The Supreme Court has cautioned courts against the misuse of domestic violence laws, expressing concern over the increasing trend of implicating family members based on vague allegations lacking specific evidence.
A bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh, in a significant ruling on February 7, quashed criminal proceedings against several family members accused of domestic violence, except for the in-laws. The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman, which the Telangana High Court had earlier refused to dismiss concerning the maternal aunt and cousin of the main accused.
Case Background
The complaint alleged that the woman’s husband and his family harassed her physically and mentally, demanding additional dowry. According to her, her mother-in-law demanded Rs 30 lakh in dowry, of which Rs 10 lakh in cash and 15 tolas of gold were provided by her mother. She further accused her husband of suspecting her character and subjecting her to harassment, allegedly with the support of his family members.
The Court noted that she left her matrimonial home in 2021, leading her husband to file a police complaint. The woman later admitted that she had left after a quarrel triggered by her husband’s reaction to her continued communication with a man over the phone.
Judicial Observations
The Supreme Court underscored that invoking criminal proceedings is a serious matter with penal consequences, warranting coercive measures only when specific acts constituting offenses under the law are clearly attributed to the accused. It emphasized that criminal laws should not be invoked indiscriminately in domestic disputes without credible material evidence.
“Criminalizing domestic disputes without specific allegations and credible material may have disastrous consequences for the institution of family, which is built on love, affection, cordiality, and mutual trust,” the Court observed. It noted that domestic relationships are deeply rooted in social and cultural values and should not be subjected to criminal scrutiny unless the accusations are precise and backed by evidence.
In the context of matrimonial disputes, where emotions run high, there is a tendency to implicate family members who either fail to intervene or remain silent during alleged instances of harassment.
However, the Court clarified that merely being a passive bystander does not amount to a criminal offense. It also highlighted the risk of exaggerated allegations during conflicts, warning against allowing domestic disputes to be unjustly criminalized.
At the same time, the Court acknowledged the reality of domestic violence, which often occurs behind closed doors, making it difficult for victims to present direct evidence. It reiterated that laws such as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, were enacted to address this issue. However, it stressed that courts must carefully assess cases to ensure that only those with specific allegations and clear instances of abuse are prosecuted, rather than subjecting entire families to sweeping criminal action.
Balancing Justice and Protection
The Court emphasized that a balance must be struck between protecting genuine victims of domestic violence and preventing misuse of legal provisions to target entire families. It stated that matrimonial discord does not usually arise spontaneously, but is the result of a series of incidents over time. Therefore, allegations in such cases should detail specific acts rather than make broad accusations.
It further clarified that while some family members may turn a blind eye to domestic violence, their inaction does not automatically make them perpetrators unless there is evidence of active collaboration. Implicating them without specific allegations or prima facie evidence would amount to an abuse of legal process.
However, the Court cautioned against generalizing its observations, making it clear that relatives who actively participate in cruelty against a victim can still be prosecuted. It stated that courts must distinguish between genuine cases and emotionally charged accusations made in the heat of a dispute, assessing each case based on its specific facts.
This ruling reinforces the Judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that domestic violence laws serve their intended purpose—protecting victims—while preventing their misuse to settle personal scores or harass innocent family members.
—By Shivam Sharma and India Legal Bureau