In domestic violence cases, SC asks courts to be on guard against misuse

The court said it needs to be assessed whether the allegations are genuine with specific criminal role or a side effect of matrimonial discord

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday asked courts to be on guard against misuse of the domestic violence law flagging its concern over the tendency of dragging family members to face prosecution on generalised allegations without there being any specific allegation or material to allege their role in perpetrating the violence.

The appellants in the Supreme Court case said they were residents of Hyderabad and had only tried to mediate between the couple in Chennai to arrive at an amicable solution (File Photo/PTI)

Deciding a case from Telangana where a wife roped in her mother-in-law’s sister and her son to face prosecution under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act), a bench of justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh said, “In criminal cases relating to domestic violence, the complaints and charges should be specific, as far as possible, as against each and every member of the family who are accused of such offences and sought to be prosecuted, as otherwise, it may amount to misuse of the stringent criminal process by indiscriminately dragging all the members of the family.”

The court quashed the case pending against one Geddam Jhansi and her son Geddam Sathyakama Jabali in the absence of any specific allegation of causing mental or physical torture to the complainant.

The bench, however, clarified, “Our observations, however, should not be generalised to mean that relatives cannot be brought under the purview of the aforesaid penal provisions when they have actively participated in inflicting cruelty on the daughter-in-law/victim.”

The bench also said, “What needs to be assessed is whether such allegations are genuine with specific criminal role assigned to such members of the family or whether it is merely a spill over and side effect of a matrimonial discord and allegations made by an emotionally disturbed person. Each and every case of domestic violence will thus depend on the peculiar facts obtaining in each case.”

In her complaint, the wife alleged that she was tortured for dowry within six months of marrying her husband, a doctor by profession, in August 2016. She claimed to have been driven out of her matrimonial home in 2020 following which she instituted the complaint under the DV Act against her husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law who resided in Chennai. However, the present appellants, were residents of Hyderabad and had only tried to mediate between the couple to arrive at an amicable solution. She filed two separate complaints – one under the DV Act and another under the Dowry Prohibition Act, dowry harassment law under Section 498A and other provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

The court specifically held that its observations are limited to these two accused and will not affect the husband, mother-in-law against whom there are specific allegations of cruelty alleged by the wife.

Signaling courts to strike a balance when faced with such cases, the court observed that “courts have to be careful while dealing with such cases by examining whether there are specific allegations with instances against the perpetrators and not generalised allegations.”

While the purpose of the DV law is to ensure perpetrators are brought to book, at the same time, “a balance has to be struck” by ensuring all the family members or relatives are not indiscriminately brought within the criminal net in a sweeping manner.

Justice Singh, writing the judgment for the bench, said, “Criminalising domestic disputes without specific allegations and credible materials to support the same may have disastrous consequences for the institution of family, which is built on the premise of love, affection, cordiality and mutual trust.” Moreover, invoking criminal process is a serious matter as it comes with penal consequences involving coercive measures, which can be permitted only when a prima facie case is made out, more so when criminal laws are invoked in domestic disputes, it added.

The court discussed several situations where family members may be unnecessarily roped in.

“There may be situations where some of the family members or relatives may turn a blind eye to the violence or harassment perpetrated to the victim and may not extend any helping hand to the victim, which does not necessarily mean that they are also perpetrators of domestic violence, unless the circumstances clearly indicate their involvement and instigation,” the bench said.

To implicate all such relatives without attributing specific offending acts to them and in the absence of any prima facie evidence showing their complicity would amount to abuse of the process of law, the bench held.

The court quashed the main case under the provisions of IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act and used its extraordinary power under Article 142 to quash the other case under DV Act against the two accused. It also set aside the decision of the Telangana high court of April 4, 2022 declining to quash the cases against the petitioners.