The Married woman has the right to live at in-laws’ home even if estranged, says Supreme Court.

Domestic violence in the country is rampant and every day some women encounter

violence in some form or other, the SC court said

• FACTS OF CASE

A case filed by a resident of Delhi seeking an appeal of a High Court judgment was been heard by the Supreme Court which ruled that his daughter-in-law has the right to live at the home of her in-laws even if the married couple were in the middle of divorce proceedings.

The apex court said that every society’s development depends on its ability to protect and promote its women’s rights. The Constitution guarantees equal rights and privileges to women which is a step towards changing the role of women in this country. Married Woman Right To Live at In-laws House

• DEFINITION OF ‘SHARED HOUSEHOLD Married Woman Right To Live at In-laws House

A bench consisting of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy, and M R Shah also set aside the interpretation of the definition of ‘shared household’ under the Act and said the definition was rather exhaustive and intended to provide the victim women with residence under the statute.

In its 151-page judgment, the bench stated that the concept of shared household provided in Section 2(s) cannot be read to mean that shared household can only be that household of which the husband is a member or in which the husband of the aggrieved person has an interest. It said that the shared household meant the location where the woman lives or has lived in a marital relationship either alone or with the husband at any point, including the house owned or tenant.

Also Read: How To File Domestic Violence Complaint under the DV Act 2005

The court further said that pending proceedings pursuant to the Domestic Violence Act, or any temporary or final order passed under the Act, relating to the right of residence in compliance with Section 19 does not constitute an injunction on the introduction or continuation of any civil proceedings affecting the subject-matter of an interim or final order passed in proceedings under the DV Act.

• EVIDENCE ACT Married Woman Right To Live at In-laws House

Within the scope of Section 43 of the Evidence Act, the judgment or order of the criminal court granting an interim or final relief pursuant to Section 19 of the DV Act is valid and may be appealed to and reviewed by the civil court, it held. A civil court is to resolve issues in litigation on the basis of evidence that has been brought before it by the parties, the judgment said.

Also Read: Woman and Domestic Violence In India

• SUPREME COURT HELD

Referring to the facts of the case, the court claimed that the litigation brought before a civil court for the eviction of a woman was entirely maintainable and that the concerns posed by her father-in-law, who claims to own the home, and by the woman claiming the right to live, had to be resolved and determined on the basis of evidence.

The decision of the top court came on an appeal against a Delhi High Court ruling by 76-year-old Delhi resident Satish Chander Ahuja. The Delhi High Court set aside an order passed in 2019 by a trial court to ask Ahuja’s daughter-in-law to vacate his premises.

The Supreme Court in its judgment on a case of domestic violence said that a woman can stay in her husband’s family home even if she is estranged from him.

Overruling its earlier decision to the contrary, the apex court’s bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and MR Shah said that an estranged daughter-in-law cannot be evicted by her husband or family members and she has a right to stay there under the Domestic Violence Act.

Under such circumstances, a woman resigns herself to the never-ending cycle of enduring violence and discrimination as a daughter, a sister, a wife, a mother, a partner or a single woman in her lifetime, it added.

The judgment dismissed an appeal filed by one Satish Chander Ahuja challenging a Delhi High Court judgment of 2019, which ruled that his daughter-in-law Sneha Ahuja had the right of residence even though she was in the process of divorce from her husband Raveen Ahuja.

In an important decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman has the right to live at the home of her in-laws under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, even if she is estranged from them. The SC ruled that the relief provided by the criminal court granting the right of residence to a married woman, which is assured under the law on domestic abuse, must be considered even if a civil case has been brought against her seeking the eviction of the married woman from her home.

Author: This article was written by Ishmeet Kaur, B.A. LLB, student of Government Mohindra Collage, Patiala.

Note: For any further information or any query you may contact us on 9855677966 or via email info@bhandarilawfirm.com