Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court has recently held that primarily, a male family member, especially the husband, is not entitled to protection under the domestic violence statute, which intends to shield married women from abuse.

A bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh said, "Prima facie it seems in view of Section 2(a) (of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005), the protection of the Act is not available to a male member of the family and more particularly the husband."

The bench, which was considering a woman's plea to have her husband's complaint against her before a local magistrate's court dismissed and halted the man's DV Act-related actions while it was being heard.

Advocate Ashima Mandla appearing for the woman submitted that in the present case, the husband has initiated proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act). The same is contrary to the Act's essence as well as to Section 2(a), which defines “aggrieved person” as woman, he said.

It was also submitted that the protection of the Act is not available to any male member, more particularly, the husband.

Furthermore, the plea submitted, "Even under section 498A of the IPC, the accused or perpetrator may be either a man or a woman, but only a female person is an injured person."

The woman cited the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora, arguing that it broadened the definition of "Respondent" or "Perpetrator" in Section 2(q) of the Domestic Violence Act to include both genders rather than just men.

In view of the above, the bench directed the proceedings in the complaint case pending before the Matrimonial Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi to remain stayed until the next hearing date.