Latest news with #DVAct
India Today
4 days ago
- India Today
In-laws can't evict widow from husband's home, rules Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court ruled that a woman cannot be evicted from her matrimonial home, even after her husband's court was hearing a case where a 41-year-old woman had accused her in-laws of trying to force her and her children out of the house she shared with her late woman had approached the Sessions Court in Palakkad under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court ruled in her favour, overturning an earlier order by a magistrate that had dismissed her plea. Her in-laws then challenged the Sessions Court's decision in the High However, the High Court dismissed their petition. Justice MB Snehalatha said that under Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act, every woman in a domestic relationship has the right to live in the shared household, regardless of whether she owns it or has any legal claim to in-laws argued that she owned another property and had not lived in the house after her husband's death. They also said there was no domestic relationship anymore, and that the DV Act should not apply to the court said the evidence showed that the in-laws had committed acts of domestic violence by trying to evict her and her children. It ruled that the Sessions Court was right in granting protection to the court called the Domestic Violence Act a landmark law meant to protect women and upheld her right to live in her matrimonial IN THIS STORY#Kerala
News18
6 days ago
- General
- News18
Widow Can't Be Thrown Out Of Matrimonial Home By In-Laws: Kerala High Court
Last Updated: A 41-year-old woman approached the courts seeking protection from harassment and forceful eviction from the shared household after her husband's demise in 2009 The Kerala High Court recently upheld a widow's right to reside in her matrimonial home, rejecting objections raised by her in-laws, who had attempted to evict her. The bench of Justice MB Snehalatha dismissed a revision petition filed by the relatives of the deceased husband of a 41-year-old woman who had approached the courts seeking protection from harassment and forceful eviction from the shared household after her husband's demise in 2009. The high court affirmed the decision of the sessions court in Palakkad, which had granted protection and residence orders in the woman's favour after overturning the findings of the judicial magistrate, who had initially dismissed her plea. The woman alleged that following her husband's death, her in-laws began to harass her and obstruct her and her children's entry into the family home. She approached the court under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. However, the magistrate's court held that she had no existing 'domestic relationship" with her in-laws and therefore wasn't entitled to relief under the Act. The sessions court took a different view and granted her the relief sought. The in-laws challenged this before the high court, arguing that the woman owned separate property and had been living at her parental home, thus disqualifying her as an 'aggrieved person" under the Act. Rejecting these arguments, the high court noted that the woman, being the wife of the deceased and having resided in the shared household, fell squarely within the definitions under Sections 2(a), 2(f), and 2(s) of the DV Act. The court reiterated that the right to reside in the shared household does not depend on ownership or continuous residence at the time of the dispute. Quoting extensively from the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in Prabha Tyagi vs Kamlesh Devi, the judgment emphasised that women's right to shelter and security within a domestic setting is fundamental and cannot be undermined merely because they possess alternate accommodation or temporarily reside elsewhere. 'This right is crucial for a woman's safety and dignity, ensuring that she is not forcibly removed or homeless due to domestic abuse," the court observed, while also stressing that the DV Act should be interpreted liberally in favour of victims, keeping its beneficial and protective purpose in mind. Finding no merit in the arguments of the in-laws, the high court refused to interfere with the sessions court order. The revision petition was, accordingly, dismissed. First Published: June 04, 2025, 16:26 IST
NDTV
03-06-2025
- General
- NDTV
Supreme Court's 7 Directions For Domestic Violence Act Implementation
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has not only asked authorities to appoint protection officers to assist victims of domestic violence across the country within six weeks, but also issued several detailed directions to Centre, States and Union Territories to ensure provisions of the Domestic Violence Act are implemented. In a significant order, the Supreme Court said that such directions have been issued as initial steps to ensure the Act's implementation in all respects. The directions came after the top court noted that despite the Act being in force for over two decades, its implementation remains uneven across India. On May 20, the bench headed by Justices BV Nagarathana and Satish Chandra Sharma had passed the order emphasising the need to appoint protection officers. A detailed order copy released today on Supreme Court website includes several key directions to states and Centre. The seven key directions from Supreme Court are: 1. Identify And Appoint Protection Officers "We direct the States and Union Territories to identify officers in the Department of Women and Child development working at the District and Taluka levels as Protection Officers and designate them as such. It is needless to observe that on such designation, the Protection Officers shall discharge their duties in terms of Section 9 of the Act." 2. Appointment Of Protection Officers Within Six Weeks "We direct the Chief Secretaries of States/Union Territories as well as the Secretaries, Department of Women and Child of the respective States and Union Territories to coordinate in this regard and ensure that the officers are designated as Protection Officers under the provisions of the Act. Such exercise shall be carried out within a period of six weeks from today wherever designation of the officers as protection officer has not taken place." 3. Awareness About Provisions For Victims Of Domestic Violence The top court directed the Centre and States to especially implement provisions of Section 11 of the Domestic Violence Act. Along with ensuring publicity at regular intervals about the provisions of the DV Act, Section 11 mandates that the central and state government officers, including the police officers and the members of the judicial services, are given periodic sensitisation and awareness training on the issues addressed by this Act. The said section also mandates effective co-ordination between the services provided by concerned Ministries and Departments dealing with law and home affairs, including law and order, health and human resources, to address issues of domestic violence and a periodical review of the same is carried out. "The respondent-States and Union Territories shall take steps to discharge their duties under Section 11 of the Act by giving wide publicity through public media about the provisions of the Act for having an effective coordination between the services provided by various Ministries and Departments for the implementation of the Act and to ensure that the protocols of the various ministries concerned with the delivery of services to women under the Act are took in place. While we may issue further directions in this regard, we expect that having regard to the explicit provisions of Section 11, the State Government shall take all measures in delineated under the said provisions." Supreme Court order read. 4. Ensure Implementation Of Section 11 Of Domestic Violence Act The Supreme Court noted that Section 11 also imposes duty on the Central Government "and, therefore, we direct that adequate and sufficient steps may be taken by the Union of India for implementation of Section 11 of the Act which is extracted above". Section 11 mandates that protocols for various Ministries concerned with the delivery of services to women under this Act, including for the courts, are prepared and put in place. 5. Free Legal Aid To Victims of Domestic Violence "We have noted that Section 9(d) of the Act read with Section 12 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 entitles a woman and particularly a distressed women who are aggrieved to legal aid. In view of this mandate, we direct the Member Secretary of NALSA to communicate to the Member Secretaries of the States/Union Territories, Legal Services Authorities, to in turn communicate to the Member Secretaries at the District level as well as the Taluka level to give wide publicity to the fact that an aggrieved women under the provisions of the Act is entitled to free legal aid and advise." 6. Role Of Member Secretaries At State, District Levels The Supreme Court said that the Member Secretaries at the States, Districts and Talukas level may also give adequate publicity to this aspect in the context of the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. "It goes without saying that should any distressed women approach the Member Secretary or any other officer of the Legal Services Authority for seeking legal aid and advice, the same would be provided expeditiously since the Act envisages that every woman is entitled to free legal aid," the order read. 7. Identify, Notify And Make Shelter Homes More Accessible To Victims Within 10 Weeks The top court said that steps shall also be taken by the concerned departments to empanel the service providers as per Section 10 of the Act. Service providers, like NGOs or Societies recognised under Section 10, record the domestic incident report in the prescribed form if the aggrieved person so desires and forward a copy thereof to the Magistrate and the Protection Officer having jurisdiction in the area where the domestic violence took place. They can also get the aggrieved person medically examined and forward a copy of the medical report to the Protection Officer and the police station within the local limits of which the domestic violence took place. Shelter homes or Nari Niketan, one stop centres or any other homes for women must be accessible to the victims of domestic violence and therefore, steps have to be taken to ensure that such homes are made available to the distressed women. "The respondent-State and Union Territories are directed to identify and notify shelter homes for this purpose at the District and Taluka levels within a period of ten weeks from today." The case came up in court after court was apprised that several states were assigning the responsibilities under the DV Act to officials already handling the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), which includes child welfare and protection duties. Senior advocate Shobha Gupta, representing the NGO We the Women, contended in court that these officers are overburdened and unable to manage the workload, leaving vulnerable women and children unsupported. Gupta argued that Designating ICDS or Anganwadi workers as Protection Officers will not be enough.
Time of India
02-06-2025
- Time of India
Women entitled to stay in matrimonial home even after hubby's death: HC
Kochi: Kerala high court has held that a woman's right to reside in her matrimonial home under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act), continues even after the death of her husband, irrespective of ownership or title. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court further observed that this right is a crucial safeguard to ensure a woman's safety, dignity and protection from being forcibly removed or rendered homeless due to domestic abuse. Justice M B Snehalatha gave the ruling while dismissing a revision petition filed by a woman's in-laws from Palakkad who sought to quash a sessions court's order. The sessions court had set aside a magistrate's finding that no domestic relationship existed between the woman and her in-laws after her husband's death. The woman's husband passed away in 2009, after which she and her children moved to her parents' home and filed a petition under the DV Act, alleging that her in-laws had attempted to evict her from the shared household and had obstructed her and her children from residing there. The magistrate's court, however, dismissed her plea, holding that she no longer had a domestic relationship with her in-laws within the meaning of the Act. On appeal, the sessions court set aside the magistrate's order and restrained the in-laws from committing any act of domestic violence. The in-laws approached HC challenging this. HC, however, found that the evidence on record established that the in-laws had attempted to dispossess the woman after her husband's death. The court held that she continues to qualify as an 'aggrieved person' under the DV Act and remains in a domestic relationship with her in-laws, both terms being explicitly defined under the statute. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now HC also emphasised that the DV Act is a progressive, rights-based legislation aimed at addressing the pervasive issue of domestic violence against women. It highlighted that Section 17 of the Act grants every woman in a domestic relationship the right to reside in the shared household, irrespective of any legal ownership or title. This right, HC observed, upholds shelter and security as essential to a woman's dignity and reflects the broader objectives of gender justice and human rights embedded in the legislation.
India Today
20-05-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Court orders appointment of domestic violence Protection officers within 6 weeks
The Supreme Court on Tuesday mandated all states and Union Territories to appoint designated Protection Officers within six weeks in order to improve the enforcement of the Protection of Women against Domestic Violence (DV) bench, comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, took note of the lack of appointed Protection Officers in many regions and issued clear instructions for states and UTs to designate 'one officer of the Women and Child Development Department or the Social Welfare Department at every District and Taluka level' under the Protection Officers are the first point of contact for women subjected to physical, mental, sexual, or financial violence within the family. These officers are responsible for ensuring appropriate action, initiating legal proceedings, and monitoring the safety and welfare of the affected women. Despite the DV Act being in force for two decades, its implementation remains uneven across the issue stems from several states assigning the responsibilities under the DV Act to officials already handling the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), which includes child welfare and protection duties. Senior advocate Shobha Gupta, representing the NGO "We the Women," argued that these officers are overburdened and unable to manage the workload, leaving vulnerable women and children unsupported.'Designating ICDS or Anganwadi workers as PO will not be enough,' Gupta various state governments cited logistical challenges such as recruitment, training, and funding as obstacles to appointing dedicated officers, Justice Nagarathna noted, 'Maybe it's an ideal long-term situation that a cadre may be created, but we cannot say someone else cannot come and help in the meantime.'The Court also directed the Central Government and the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) to support the Act's enforcement. The bench instructed NALSA's Member Secretary to coordinate with state and UT legal services authorities to publicise the availability of free legal aid and advice for vulnerable women at the district and taluka InMust Watch
