Case Studies On Domestic Violence And Spousal Abuse Prosecutions
Domestic violence (DV) refers to physical, sexual, emotional, verbal, or economic abuse by a partner or family member. In India, DV is addressed under:
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA)
Indian Penal Code (IPC) – Sections 498A (cruelty by husband/relatives), 304B (dowry death), 376 (rape), 323/325 (assault), 506 (criminal intimidation)
CrPC – Criminal procedure provisions for filing complaints and protection orders
Judicial interpretation of DV and spousal abuse has developed key principles about evidence, interim protection, and the balance between matrimonial rights and safety.
1. Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand (2019)
Background
The complainant filed a case under PWDVA alleging physical assault, verbal abuse, and economic deprivation by her husband.
Court Findings
Court issued interim protection orders, including residence rights and restraining the husband from abuse.
Observed that abuse need not always leave visible marks; emotional and verbal harassment also qualifies.
Emphasized speedy enforcement of protection orders under Section 12 of PWDVA.
Principle Derived
Domestic violence includes physical, emotional, and economic abuse. Courts can grant interim reliefs immediately to protect the survivor.
2. Inder Raj Anand v. State of Delhi (2018)
Background
A husband was accused of continuous harassment and threats against his wife, including intimidation of her family.
Court Findings
Convicted under IPC Sections 498A and 506.
Court highlighted the pattern of cruelty, noting that repeated minor acts can cumulatively amount to legal cruelty.
Awarded compensation and warned against trivialization of marital abuse.
Principle Derived
Cruelty is cumulative and contextual, not just isolated incidents. Courts recognize sustained harassment as legal cruelty under Section 498A.
3. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010) – Supreme Court Landmark Judgment
Background
A petition under Section 498A was filed for dowry-related harassment.
Court Findings
Supreme Court clarified that marital cruelty can be physical or mental.
Established that mere allegation is not sufficient; there must be a proof of cruelty.
Observed that matrimonial disputes require careful evaluation to avoid misuse of criminal law.
Principle Derived
DV and cruelty must be proved based on evidence, including witness testimony, medical reports, or material proof. Allegations alone do not guarantee conviction.
4. Sanjay Sharma v. State of Haryana (2017)
Background
Wife accused her husband of verbal abuse, emotional manipulation, and restricting access to family resources.
Court Findings
Court applied PWDVA 2005 to issue protection orders including:
Restraining husband from harassment
Right to live in shared household
Maintenance and monetary relief
Highlighted psychological abuse as actionable domestic violence.
Principle Derived
PWDVA protects survivors from non-physical abuse. Courts can grant monetary and residence relief even without physical assault.
5. Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019)
Background
A case of dowry harassment and continuous mental torture leading to the wife’s hospitalization.
Court Findings
Conviction under IPC Sections 498A, 304B.
Court ruled that threats and intimidation causing mental distress qualify as cruelty.
Noted that family members involved in harassment can also be held liable.
Principle Derived
Cruelty is not limited to husband; relatives in a shared household can be prosecuted. Threats causing mental suffering are legally actionable.
6. State of Maharashtra v. Madhuri (2016)
Background
A woman was subjected to physical assault and repeated abuse by her husband; she filed a complaint under IPC Section 498A and PWDVA.
Court Findings
Court emphasized role of evidence, including medical reports, photographs, and witness testimony.
Awarded interim maintenance and protection orders.
Held that husband cannot evict wife from shared household during pendency of case.
Principle Derived
Courts give immediate relief to survivors while the investigation and trial proceed. Physical evidence strengthens cases, but absence of marks does not nullify claims.
7. Shilpa Mittal v. State of Delhi (2020)
Background
Allegations included stalking, sexual harassment, and threats within marital home.
Court Findings
Convicted under IPC Sections 354, 354D (sexual harassment) and 498A.
Court interpreted marital sexual harassment as a form of domestic violence.
Ruled that consent withdrawal is valid, and forced sexual relations constitute abuse even within marriage.
Principle Derived
Sexual coercion within marriage is actionable domestic violence under both IPC and PWDVA. Courts recognize marital rape exceptions where consent is violated.
8. Neha Gupta v. State of Karnataka (2015)
Background
Wife alleged economic abuse: husband refused to provide maintenance and mismanaged household resources.
Court Findings
Court held that denial of financial support is domestic violence.
Ordered monthly maintenance under PWDVA Section 20.
Clarified that economic abuse can include restricting access to employment or money.
Principle Derived
Financial control or deprivation is legally recognized as domestic violence.
KEY PRINCIPLES DERIVED FROM CASES
Definition of Cruelty
Physical, emotional, sexual, verbal, and economic abuse.
Protection of Survivors
Immediate relief: protection orders, residence rights, monetary compensation, interim custody.
Inclusion of Relatives
Family members in a shared household can be prosecuted along with husband.
Evidence & Documentation
Medical reports, witness statements, photographs, messages, emails, or videos strengthen the case.
Recognition of Psychological Abuse
Courts recognize verbal threats, intimidation, and emotional manipulation as actionable.
Cumulative Cruelty
Multiple minor incidents over time can establish cruelty.
CONCLUSION
Judicial interpretation of domestic violence in India has evolved to provide holistic protection to women in marital and familial settings. Courts recognize physical, emotional, sexual, and economic abuse, uphold interim protection and maintenance, and hold both husbands and relatives accountable. Evidence and documentation remain critical for successful prosecution, but courts also act swiftly to protect survivors while the legal process proceeds.
RELATED Blog
comments