Challa Sivakumar and Ors. vs. Challa Anita and Ors

(24.10.2018 - HYHC) : MANU/HY/0155/2018
She taken shelter in her parental home and efforts made by elders did not fructify and though husband wanted divorce on promise of paying money but betrayed her and hence she was constrained to file divorce application and obtained decree and later filed complaint to obtain reliefs - Decree of divorce would not interdict her from filing complaint under Act in respect of act of domestic violence - Plea of non-existence of domestic relationship could not be taken as an exception to entertain petition

Kasturi vs. Subhas

(03.08.2017 - KARHC) : MANU/KA/1902/2017
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Petitioner / husband challenged very maintainability of petition filed under provisions of Act by Respondent / wife - Whether petition filed by Respondent / wife was barred by limitation - Held, "Domestic violence" under section 3 of Act among others takes into its fold 'economic abuse' also - Omission of husband in neglecting to maintain aggrieved person, who was at receiving end, falls within description of Section 3 of Act - Obligation of husband continues throughout matrimonial life and husband could not get away with excuse that for many years no request was made by wife for maintenance amount - Very fact that Petitioner / Husband had led life with another woman during subsistence of his marriage with his wife and begot children from second wife amounts to emotional abuse as contemplated by Section 3 (a) of Act, endangering mental and physical well-being of aggrieved person - This was another form of domestic violence within meaning of Section 3 (a) of Act - Petitioner was guilty of offence of domestic violence

V.D. Bhanot vs. Savita Bhanot

(07.02.2012 - SC) : MANU/SC/0115/2012
Para 5.Before the Delhi High Court, the only question which came up for determination was whether the petition under the provisions of the PWD Act, 2005, was maintainable by a woman, who was no longer residing with her husband or who was allegedly subjected to any act of domestic violence prior to the coming into force of the PWD Act on 26th October, 2006. After considering the constitutional safeguards under Article 21 of the Constitution, vis-�-vis, the provisions of Sections 31 and 33 of the PWD Act, 2005, and after examining the statement of objects and reasons for the enactment of the PWD Act, 2005, the learned Judge held that it was with the view of protecting the rights of women under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution that the Parliament enacted the PWD Act, 2005, in order to provide for some effective protection of rights guaranteed under the Constitution to women, who are victims of any kind of violence occurring within the family and matters connected therewith and incidental thereto, and to provide an efficient and expeditious civil remedy to them. The learned Judge accordingly held that a petition under the provisions of the PWD Act, 2005, is maintainable even if the acts of domestic violence had been committed prior to the coming into force of the said Act, notwithstanding the fact that in the past she had lived together with her husband in a shared household, but was no more living with him, at the time when the Act came into force. The learned Judge, accordingly, set aside the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge and directed him to consider the appeal filed by the Respondent wife on merits.

Ramendra Kishore Bhattacharjee vs. Madhurima Bhattacharjee

(10.02.2021 - Tripura) : MANU/TR/0083/2021
Para 29. In this case, the wife who filed the application under Section 12 of the DV Act in the trial court is obviously an aggrieved person within the meaning of the Act because she made allegations of domestic violence against her husband and the fact that she was in a domestic relationship with the husband as his wife has been admitted by her respondent husband. Now the question is whether the wife proved commission of domestic violence against her husband at the trial court and become entitled to a relief under Section 12 of the DV Act.
Para 31. Apparently, domestic violence has been defined under Section 3 of the Act in a very wider term and with regard to proof of domestic violence, explanation II to said Section 3 provides that for determining whether any act, an omission, commission or conduct of the respondent constitutes "domestic violence" under the said Section, the overall facts and circumstances of the case, shall be taken into consideration.