It is true that the expression “female” has not been used in the proviso to Section 2(q) also, but, on the other hand, if the Legislature intended to exclude females from the ambit of the complaint, which can be filed by an aggrieved wife, females would have been specifically excluded, instead of it being provided in the proviso that a complaint could also be filed against a relative of the husband or the male partner. No restrictive meaning has been given to the expression “relative”, nor has the said expression been specifically defined in the Domestic ViolenceDomestic violence Genuine cases of cruelty and violence in domestic sphere, which do happen, ought to be handled with utmost sensitivity. Domestic violence typically happens within the four walls of the house and not in the public gaze. Therefore, such violence is not noticed by public at large, except perhaps by the immediate neighbours. Thus, providing visible evidence by the victim of violence may not be easily forthcoming and producing direct evidence may be hard and arduous, which does not necessarily mean that violence does not occur. For a matrimonial relationship which is founded on the basis of cordiality and trust to turn sour to an extent to make a partner to hurl allegations of violence and harassment against the other partner, would normally not happen at the spur of the moment and such acrimonious relationship would develop only in course of time. Accordingly, such a situation would be the culmination of a series of acts which turns, otherwise an amicable relationship, into a fractured one. (Geddam Jhansi & Anr. v. The State of Telangana & Ors.-[2025] 3 S.C.R. ) Act, 2005, to make it specific to males only.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIAArticle 124 of the Constitution of India Constitution of India > 124. Supreme Court (1) There shall be a Supreme Court of India consisting of a Chief Justice of India and, until Parliament by law prescribes a larger number, of not more than seven other Judges. (2) Every Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal and shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-five years: Provided that-- (a) a Judge may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office (b) a Judge may be removed from his office in the manner provided in clause (4). (2A) The age of a Judge of the Supreme Court shall be determined by such authority and in such manner as Parliament may by law provide. (3) A person shall not be qualified for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court unless he is a citizen of India and-- (a) has been for at least five years a Judge of a High Court or of two or more such Courts in succession; or (b) has been for at least ten years an advocate of a High Court or of two or more such courts in succession; or (c) is, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist. (4) A Judge of the Supreme Court shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-third of the members of the House present and voting has been presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehavior or incapacity. (5) Parliament may by law regulate the procedure for the presentation of an address and for the investigation and proof of the misbehavior or incapacity of a Judge under clause (4): (6) Every person appointed to be a Judge of the Supreme Court shall, before he enters upon his office, make and subscribe before the President, or some person appointed in that behalf by him, an oath or affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in the Third Schedule. (7) No person who has held office as a Judge of the Supreme Court shall plead or act in any court or before any authority within the territory of India.
DIVISION BENCH
( Before : Cyriac Joseph, J; Altamas Kabir, J )
SOU. SANDHYA MANOJ WANKHADE — Appellant
Vs.
MANOJ BHIMRAO WANKHADE AND OTHERS — Respondent
Criminal A. No. 271 of 2011
Decided on : 31-01-2011
Penal CodePenal Code Indian Penal Code (Naya Samhita-2023), Pakistan Penal code-1960,, 1860 (IPC) – Section 498A
Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Section 12, Section 18, Section 19, Section 2, Section 20, Section 22, Section 23, Section 29
Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Section 2(q) – Ambit – Legislature never intended to exclude female relatives of husband or male partner from ambit of complaint that can be made under provisions of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – No restrictive meaning has been given to expression “relative”, nor has said expression been specifically defined in Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to make it specific to males only – Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENTJudgment The statement given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or order - CPC 2(9). It contains a concise statement of the case, points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for such decision - Order 20 Rule 4(2). Section 354 of CrPC requires that every judgment shall contain points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. Indian Supreme Court Decisions > Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts (Art 141 Indian Constitution) Civil and judicial authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court (Art 144) Supreme Court Network On Judiciary – Portal > Denning: “Judges do not speak, as do actors, to please. They do not speak, as do advocates, to persuade. They do not speak, as do historians, to recount the past. They speak to give Judgment. And in their judgments, you will find passages, which are worthy to rank with the greatest literature….” Law Points on Judgment Writing > The judge must write to provide an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of law and fact which arise for decision. Judgments are primarily meant for those whose cases are decided by judges (State Bank of India and Another Vs Ajay Kumar Sood SC 2022)
1. The Appellant herein was married to the Respondent No. 1 on 20th January, 2005, and the marriage was registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. After her marriage, the Appellant began to reside with the Respondent No. 1 at Khorej Colony, Amravati, where her widowed mother-in-lawLaw νόμος: Positive command of sovereign or divine. One can be ruled either by a Statute, a Statue, or a Statement. Legislation is the rule-making process by a political or religious organisation. Physics governs natural law. Logical thinking is a sign of a healthy brain function. Dharma is eternal for Sanatanis. Judiciary > Show me the face, and I will show you the law. Some people know how to bend the law rather than break it. Law Practice. Read a scholarly article and sister-in-law, the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 respectively, were residing. According to the Appellant, the marriage began to turn sour after about one year of the marriage and she was even assaulted by her husband and by the other Respondents. It is her specific case that on 16th June, 2007, she was mercilessly beaten by the Respondent No. l, which incident was reported to the police and a case u/s 498A I.P.C. came to be registered against him. In addition to the above, the Appellant appears to have filed a complaint against all the Respondents under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, hereinafter referred to as “the Domestic Violence Act, 2005”. An application filed by the Appellant before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amravati, u/s 23 of the above Act was allowed by the learned Magistrate directing the Respondent No. 1 husband to pay interim maintenance to the Appellant at the rate of 1,500/- per month from the date of the application till the final disposal of the main application and also restrained all the Respondents from dispossessing the Appellant from her matrimonial homeHome Αρχική > at Khorej Colony, Amravati, till the final disposal of the main application.
2. The Respondent No. 2 thereafter filed an application in Misc. Crl. Application No. 203 of 2007 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amravati, prayingPraying It can be interpreted as a political idea. It implicitly assumes the existence of the powerful and the powerless, with an intermediate agency positioned between them. This agency, often unquestioned and abstract, functions to preserve the existing balance between power and poverty. In doing so, prayer operates as a mechanism that normalizes hierarchy, encourages acceptance over challenge, and sustains the status quo without requiring conscious awareness from those who participate in it. for modification of its order and a direction to the Appellant to leave the house of Respondent No. 2. The said application for modification was dismissed by the learned Magistrate holding that it was not maintainable. Thereupon, the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 filed Crl. Appeal No. 159 of 2008 on 11th August, 2008, u/s 29 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 on the ground that being women they could not be made Respondents in the proceedings filed by the Appellant under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and that the matrimonial house of the Appellant at Khorej Colony, Amravati, belonged exclusively to Ramabai, the Respondent No. 2 and mother-in-law of the Appellant and did not, therefore, come within the definition of “shared house”. The said Criminal AppealCriminal Appeal Shankar Kerba Jadhav and others vs. The State of Maharashtra (AIR 1971 SC 840): "An appeal is a creature of a statute and the powers and jurisdiction of the appellate Court must be circumscribed by the words of the statute. At the same time a Court of appeal is a "Court of error" and its normal function is to correct the decision appealed from and its jurisdiction should be co-extensive with that of the trial Court. It cannot and ought not to do something which the trial Court was not competent to do. There does not seem to be any fetter to its power to do what the trial Court could do." was allowed setting aside the injunction restraining the Respondents from dispossessing or evicting the Appellant from her matrimonial house at Khorej Colony, Amravati. The Respondent No. 1 husband was directed to provide separate accommodation for the residence of the Appellant or to pay a sum of 1,000/- per month to the Appellant from the date of filing of the application till its final decision, in lieu of providing accommodation.
3. In Criminal Writ PetitionPetition αναφορά > παρακαλώ (Prayer) No. 588 of 2009 filed before the High CourtHigh Court High Court Judges in England and Wales handle complex and tough cases, sitting in London and traveling to court centers around the country. They preside over serious criminal and important civil cases, and support the Lord and Lady Justices in hearing appeals. High Court Judges are commonly referred to as ‘Mr/Mrs/Ms Justice surname’ and are given the prefix ‘The Honourable’. They are assigned to the King’s Bench Division, the Family Division, or the Chancery Division. The King’s Bench Division focuses on civil wrongs and judicial review, the Family Division deals with family law, and the Chancery Division handles various cases including company law and probate. Judges are appointed through a rigorous process overseen by the Judicial Appointments Commission. of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, the Appellant herein challenged the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Amravati, in Crl. Appeal No. 159 of 2008, claiming that she had a right to stay in her matrimonial house. Although, the question as to whether a female member of the husband’s family could be made a party to the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, had been raised in the criminal appeal, the learned Sessions Judge in his order did not decide the said question and did not absolve the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in his order, but only observed that female members cannot be made parties in proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, as “females” are not included in the definition of “respondent” in Section 2(q) of the said Act.
4. The learned Single Judge of the High Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Appellant to vacate her matrimonial house, which was in the name of the Respondent No. 2, with a further direction to the Trial CourtTrial court Court of original Jurisdiction > the court which examines the evidences for the first time. to expedite the hearing of the Misc. Crl. Application No. 203 of 2007 filed by the Appellant herein and to decide the same within a period of six months. A further direction was given confirming the order relating to deletion of the names of the ‘other members’ from the complaint filed by the Appellant. The judgment of the High Court was challenged before the Supreme Court in Crl. A. No. 271 of 2011. Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court held:
13. It is true that the expression “female” has not been used in the proviso to Section 2(q) also, but, on the other hand, if the Legislature intended to exclude females from the ambit of the complaint, which can be filed by an aggrieved wife, females would have been specifically excluded, instead of it being provided in the proviso that a complaint could also be filed against a relative of the husband or the male partner. No restrictive meaning has been given to the expression “relative”, nor has the said expression been specifically defined in the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to make it specific to males only.
14. In such circumstances, it is clear that the legislature never intended to exclude female relatives of the husband or male partner from the ambit of a complaint that can be made under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
15. In our view, both the Sessions Judge and the High Court went wrong in holding otherwise, possibly being influenced by the definition of the expression “respondent” in the main body of Section 2(q) of the aforesaid Act.
16. The Appeal, therefore, succeeds. The judgments and orders, both of the learned Sessions Judge, Amravati, dated 15th July, 2009 and the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 5th March, 2010, in Crl. Writ Petition No. 588 of 2009 are set aside. Consequently, the trial Court shall also proceed against the said Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on the complaint filed by the Appellant.
17. The appeal is allowed accordingly.
Final Result : Allowed
Citation: (2011) 72 ACC 940 : (2011) 99 AIC 81 : (2011) AIRAIR All India Reporter(SCW) 1327 : (2011) 3 AIRJharR 337 : (2011) 2 AirKarR 59 : (2011) AIR(SC)Cri 567 : (2011) ALLMR(Cri) 975 : (2012) 2 ALT(Crl) 391 : (2011) 59 BLJR 321 : (2011) 1 CG.L.R.W. 329 : (2011) 1 CGBCLJ 40 : (2011) 1 CriCC 847 : (2011) CriLJ 1687 : (2011) 2 CTC 455 : (2011) Sup CutLT(Criminal) 1321 : (2011) 2 DMC 811 : (2011) 2 ECrC 59 : (2011) 2 GLR 1111 : (2011) 2 GujLH 1111 : (2011) 1 HLR 668 : (2011) 2 JCC 717 : (2011) 2 JLJR 106 : (2011) 3 JT 264 : (2011) SN2 KCCR 166 : (2011) 1 KerLJ 57 : (2011) 1 KLT 609 : (2011) 4 LW 328 : (2011) 2 LW(Cri) 190 : (2011) 3 MhLJ(Crl) 73 : (2011) 2 MLJ(Criminal) 429 : (2011) 3 MPHT 190 : (2011) 2 MPWN 102 : (2011) 1 NCC 691 : (2011) 2 PLJR 71 : (2011) 2 RCR(Civil) 1 : (2011) 1 RCR(Criminal) 884 : (2011) 1 RecentApexJudgments(RAJ) 557 : (2011) 2 SCALE 94 : (2011) 3 SCCSCC Supreme Court Cases 650 : (2011) 2 SCC(Civil) 41 : (2011) 2 SCC(Cri) 21 : (2011) 2 SCRSupreme Court Reports It is the official Reporter of the reportable decisions delivered by the Supreme Court of India. It is published under the authority of the Supreme Court of India by the Controller of Publications, Government of India. 261 : (2011) 1 UJ(SC) 571 : (2011) 2 WLC 45 : (2011) 1 WLN 53