Last week, in Hiralal Harsora v. Kusum Harsora, the Supreme Court held that Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is unconstitutional to the extent that it defines “respondents” under the Act to only include “adult males” and the relatives of an aggrieved woman’s husband/domestic partner. In effect, the judgment included women and minors within the definition of respondents, such that cases can now be filed against them under the Act. In this post, I argue that women should be exempt from the definition, at least as against their marital relatives. This exemption is based on power differentials within the family – power differentials that structure the occurrence, the subjective experience, as well as the adjudicatory evaluation of domestic violence.
Women as Respondents under the Domestic Violence Act: Critiquing Harsora v. Harsora
Further reading
Speakers and Schedule of the Fourth Edition of the Court and Constitution Conference, 2023 at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad.
[As part of our New Scholarship section, we have been inviting discussants to respond to the public law-themed articles featured in Volume 5 the Indian Law Review. You can access all the posts in...
[Ed Note: As part of our New Scholarship section, we have been inviting discussants to respond to public law themed articles featured in Volume 5 the Indian Law Review. You can access the posts in...
[Ed Note: As part of our New Scholarship section, we have been inviting discussants to respond to the public law themed articles featured in Volume 5 the Indian Law Review. You can access the posts...
The article revolves around the recent order promulgated by China's National Radio and Television Administration (NRTA). The authors examine the same through the lens of international human rights...
Varadaraja Shivaraya Mallar, who taught at seven law schools across India, left us on Saturday. With his ebulliently booming voice, Professor V.S. Mallar introduced generations of students to the...