HC Dismisses Plea of Mother-in-law Seeking to Appeal Domestic Violence Order

SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has disposed of a petition filed by a woman seeking to challenge two judicial orders issued under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, observing that she does not fall within the statutory definition of an “aggrieved person” and therefore lacks the standing to file an appeal under Section 29 of the Act.

The case, titled CM(M) No. 310/2024, was heard by Hon’ble Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul. The petitioner, represented by advocates SN Ratanpuri and Fiza Khursheed, had challenged the orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Budgam on March 4, 2024, and subsequently by the Principal Sessions Judge, Budgam, on August 8, 2024. These orders had arisen from a domestic violence complaint filed by the petitioner’s daughter-in-law.

The High Court noted that the petitioner was not a party to the original domestic violence proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Act, nor was any order passed directly against her. The Sessions Court had already refused her application for leave to appeal on these grounds, asserting that she was not an “aggrieved person” as per Section 2(a) of the Act.

Section 2(a) of the Act defines an “aggrieved person” as “any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent.”

The petitioner, who is the mother-in-law of the complainant, had argued through counsel that she should be entitled to appeal under Section 29 as she believed herself to be aggrieved by the order in a broader sense. However, the court held that she neither qualified as an “aggrieved person” under the Act nor had been a party before the Trial Court.

It was also submitted by the respondent’s counsel, Amir Hussain Khan, that the petitioner had already initiated a separate proceeding under Section 12 of the Act against her son and daughter-in-law, which is currently pending before the Trial Court.

In a measured response to the petitioner’s submission seeking liberty to be impleaded in the original proceedings, the High Court disposed of the matter with a direction. The court stated that “in case petitioner approaches the Trial Court with an application for impleading her as party, the Trial Court, after seeking objections, shall consider and decide it and pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with the provisions of law.”

Justice Koul concluded the hearing by disposing of the petition in light of the legal constraints of the Act, while providing the petitioner with a procedural avenue to seek impleadment in the ongoing domestic violence matter.

The judgment clarifies the restricted scope of who may appeal under the Domestic Violence Act, reaffirming that only women who allege domestic violence by respondents with whom they are in a domestic relationship may be considered “aggrieved persons.” It also underscores the procedural recourse available to others seeking participation in such matters, subject to the discretion of the Trial Court.