In a landmark decision, the Allahabad High Court has expanded the ambit of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, by recognizing a mother-in-law as an “aggrieved person” entitled to seek protection against abuse by her daughter-in-law.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
LUCKNOW,UP: In a significant ruling affirming the broader scope of protection under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Allahabad High Court has held that a mother-in-law can be considered an aggrieved person and is entitled to initiate proceedings against her daughter-in-law if subjected to domestic abuse.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Alok Mathur in the case Smt Garima and 5 Others v. State of UP, wherein the Court upheld the issuance of summons by a Lucknow trial court to a daughter-in-law and her family members, acting on a complaint filed by the mother-in-law.
Key Observations by the Court
Justice Mathur emphasized that Section 12 of the Act allows
any aggrieved woman to approach the Magistrate for relief, provided she is or was in a domestic relationship and resided in a shared household with the respondent.
Rejecting the contention that the statute only benefits daughters-in-law or wives, the Court clarified:
“In case the mother-in-law is harassed or physically or mentally tortured by the daughter-in-law or any other member of the family, certainly she could be brought within the fold of aggrieved person.”
The Court reinforced that the 2005 legislation is a beneficial statute, and its applicability must be liberally interpreted to ensure justice for all women victims of domestic violence, regardless of their position in the family hierarchy.
ALSO READ: Women, Domestic Violence, And Misuse: Dangerous Narratives
Background of the Case
The mother-in-law had alleged that her daughter-in-law was pressuring her husband (the complainant’s son) to sever ties and live with her parental family. She further claimed instances of misbehavior, threats, and intimidation, including the threat of false legal action.
Challenging the trial court’s summons, the daughter-in-law argued that the complaint was retaliatory in nature—filed only after she had lodged a domestic violence and dowry harassment case against her in-laws.
However, the High Court, after considering both sides and analyzing the legal framework, ruled that the mother-in-law’s complaint demonstrated a prima facie case under Section 12 and was therefore maintainable.
Justice Mathur explained:
“A conjoint reading of the provisions indicates that an aggrieved person can be any woman who has lived in a domestic relationship in a shared household with the respondent. In this case, the mother-in-law meets that criterion and is therefore entitled to seek remedies under the Act.”
The petition challenging the summons was dismissed, reaffirming that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act is not restricted solely to wives or daughters-in-law, but is available to any woman suffering domestic abuse within a shared household, including mothers-in-law.
This judgment thus broadens the interpretive horizon of the Act, strengthening protections for elderly women and ensuring equality in the application of domestic violence laws.
ALSO READ: “Domestic Violence & Section 498A IPC are the Most Abused Provisions”: Supreme Court
READ JUDGEMENT HERE:
READ MORE REPORTS ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE