India’s domestic violence law protects women, but male victims, senior citizens and abused parents remain legally invisible. Here is why reform is overdue.
NEW DELHI: India’s Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was enacted to protect women from violence within the family. Its objective was necessary. Its present limitation is not.
Under Section 2(a), an “aggrieved person” means any woman in a domestic relationship who alleges domestic violence. That means a husband, father, brother, son or elderly male parent cannot approach the Magistrate as a victim under the DV Act, even if he is beaten, threatened, financially abused, dispossessed, falsely implicated or mentally tortured inside his own home.
This is the legal contradiction: the Act recognises domestic violence as physical, verbal, emotional, sexual and economic abuse, but recognises only women as complainants. Violence is gender-neutral in reality, but gender-specific in remedy.
THE SUPREME COURT HAS ALREADY OPENED ONE DOOR
In Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora, the Supreme Court struck down the words “adult male” from Section 2(q) of the DV Act, holding that limiting the “respondent” only to adult males violated Article 14. After this judgment, even a woman can be proceeded against as a respondent in a DV case.
But the Court did not make the complainant side gender-neutral. The victim under the Act still remains a woman. So today, a woman can be accused under the DV Act, but a man cannot be an aggrieved person under the same Act.
That is not equality. That is half-reform.
THE COURTROOM REALITY NOBODY WANTS TO DISCUSS
In matrimonial litigation, the common courtroom exchange is brutally familiar:
“Where is the injury report?”
“Where are the messages?”
“Where is the recording?”
“Why did you not complain earlier?”
Men face these questions too. But unlike women under the DV Act, men do not have a dedicated civil protection mechanism for residence orders, protection orders, monetary relief, compensation or emergency intervention.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly warned that matrimonial laws can be misused. In Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, the Court noted the tendency to implicate husband’s relatives on exaggerated allegations and called for a serious relook at Section 498A IPC.
In Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P., the Court examined safeguards against misuse of Section 498A. Later, in Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India, the Court modified some directions but did not deny the problem of misuse.
The legal position is clear: genuine women victims must be protected, but false or exaggerated matrimonial litigation is also a judicially recognised reality.
BNS CHANGED THE NUMBER, NOT THE BIAS
After the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the old IPC Section 498A framework continues through Section 85 BNS, which punishes a husband or his relative for cruelty to a woman. Section 86 BNS defines cruelty. The structure remains gender-specific: only cruelty by husband or his relatives towards a woman is covered.
So even after criminal law reform, India still has no equivalent domestic cruelty provision for a husband, father or male partner abused inside a domestic relationship.
GENDER-NEUTRAL LAW DOES NOT WEAKEN WOMEN. IT STRENGTHENS JUSTICE.
A gender-neutral domestic violence law does not mean removing protection from women. It means extending protection to every genuine victim.
The law can still preserve special safeguards for women where necessary. But the remedy must not be denied merely because the victim is male.
A reformed law should allow:
- Men, women and senior citizens to file domestic violence complaints.
- Protection against physical, emotional, verbal, sexual and economic abuse.
- Strict penalties for false complaints and perjury.
- Emergency protection orders for all victims.
- Gender-sensitive procedure, not gender-blind denial.
INDIA CANNOT CALL ITSELF EQUAL WHILE IGNORING MALE VICTIMS
The Constitution promises equality before law. A victim’s pain does not become legally irrelevant because he is male.
- If a woman is beaten, she deserves protection.
- If a man is beaten, he also deserves protection.
- If a senior citizen father is thrown out, he deserves protection.
- If a husband is blackmailed, assaulted or economically abused, he deserves protection.
The solution is not anti-woman. The solution is anti-abuse.
India needs gender-neutral domestic violence laws because justice cannot be selective. Law must protect the victim, punish the abuser, and stop treating gender as proof of guilt or innocence.
FAQs
No. The complainant or “aggrieved person” under the DV Act is only a woman.
Yes. After Hiral P. Harsora, the respondent need not be only an adult male.
Not as an “aggrieved person” under the DV Act. He must use other civil or criminal remedies depending on facts.
No. It means protecting all genuine victims while keeping strong remedies against real abuse.
Because domestic violence can be physical, emotional, verbal and economic, and these abuses are not limited to one gender.