In a groundbreaking decision that promises to inject more fairness into marital disputes, the Supreme Court’s two-judge bench has provided a fresh interpretation of the Domestic Violence Act 2005’s provisions. The interpretation lays emphasis on ensuring greater inclusivity and accessibility, aiming to ensure relief to victims under different circumstances.
Background of the Case
Presided over by Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hemant Gupta, the bench analyzed the Domestic Violence Act 2005’s provisions. The reinterpretation was stimulated by an order passed by a Panipat Sessions Judge that directed the respondent to provide maintenance to his deceased brother’s widow and minor child.
Both brothers had previously been residents of the same ancestral family home, occupying different floors. Following the death of one brother, the surviving widow was denied permission to reside within the shared family home. This led to the reevaluation of the situation in light of the Domestic Violence Act 2005.
The New Provision as Interpreted by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court ventured into defining “relationship” within the context of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). As per the court’s interpretation, a relationship within an HUF is defined as “a condition where two individuals cohabit or have cohabitated in a shared household at any time, being related by consanguinity, marriage, a relation resembling marriage, adoption, or being members of a joint family”.
Interpretation of ‘Shared Household’
Moreover, the court extended the definition of a “shared household” as inclusive of a household which belongs to a joint family where the respondent is a member. This definition stands irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved party holds any right, title, or interest in the shared household.
Key Facts of the New Provision: A Brief Snapshot
| Point of Law | Definition / Interpretation |
|---|---|
| “Relationship” within HUF | A condition where two individuals cohabit or have cohabitated at any time in a shared household. The relationship is established by consanguinity, marriage, a relation resembling marriage, adoption, or being members of a joint family. |
| “Shared Household” | An inclusive term that covers a household belonging to a joint family of which the respondent is a member. This stands irrespective of whether the aggrieved party or respondent holds any right, title, or interest in the shared household. |
The Impact of the New Provisions
The new interpretation of the Domestic Violence Act 2005 by the Supreme Court offers a more encompassing definition of “relationship” and “shared household”. It has the potential to guarantee more fairness in cases of marital discord, ensuring that victims who have lived in a common household are protected, regardless of their legal rights over the property.
