Calcutta High Court upheld interim maintenance granted to a Hindu woman who married a Muslim man under Islamic rites. It noted Supreme Court of India ruling that a Muslim husband must pay maintenance until a competent court declares marriage void.
The Supreme Court of India denied anticipatory bail to a husband accused of brutal domestic violence, with Justices Aravind Kumar and P. B. Varale observing that a husband cannot “treat his wife like an animal” under marriage’s protection
The Supreme Court of India took suo motu cognisance of the brutal assault of an advocate and directed the Delhi Police Commissioner to assign the probe to an officer. It sought a status report on hospitals denying treatment.”
The Delhi High Court has held that allegations of physical assault, verbal abuse, and obscene or inappropriate conduct within a household at the interim stage fall within the broad definition of domestic violence under the PWDV Act 2005.
The Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow Bench quashed criminal proceedings against Raghvendra Narain Khanna and others over allegations of dowry demand and assault. The court termed prosecution after divorce, cruelty by wife, “abuse of process of law.”
The Supreme Court of India upheld life imprisonment of a Rajasthan man for burning his wife over a domestic dispute. Justices Sanjay Karol and N. K. Singh highlighted patriarchy and persistent domestic violence reflecting deep-rooted social issues.
The Supreme Court set aside a dowry-harassment FIR against a woman’s parents-in-law and sister-in-law in Uttar Pradesh, ruling that vague matrimonial allegations should not trigger criminal proceedings. It stressed that criminal law must not serve as personal vendetta.
The Gujarat High Court set aside the man’s conviction for cruelty and abetment, stating that a single incident of slapping his wife for staying at her parental home without informing was not cruelty while acquitting him in law.
The Supreme Court set aside a bail order issued by Allahabad High Court in a dowry death case, calling it one of the most shocking and disappointing orders and saying that it led to a “travesty of justice.”
The Delhi High Court held a wife cannot seek residence under the DV Act if she moved to housing and is not roofless. Court said the law protects against dispossession, not reinstatement to a home abandoned by choice.
