Allegations Of Physical Assault & Obscene Conduct Within Family Fall Within Ambit Of “Domestic Violence” Under DV Act: Delhi High Court

The Court was hearing a petition challenging the appellate order passed under Section 29 of the PWDV Act, which modified the Trial Court's order granting interim maintenance to the respondent-wife under Section 12 of the Act.

A Single Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed: “There are also allegations of inappropriate and obscene conduct by the brother of the petitioner towards her, as well as allegations of physical assault by the petitioner and his family members. Such allegations, if taken at face value, fall within the broad contours of ‘domestic violence’ as defined under the PWDV Act.”

The petitioner was represented by Prateek Jain, Advocate, while the respondent was represented by Sunnirudh Kumar and Ruby Rani, Advocates.

Background

The parties were married in 2013 and have two minor children. Due to matrimonial discord, they began living separately in 2019, with each parent having custody of one child. The respondent-wife thereafter initiated proceedings under Section 12 of the PWDV Act, alleging acts of mental, physical, and economic abuse by the petitioner-husband and his family members.

The allegations included claims of being subjected to physical assault, verbal abuse, humiliation, and harassment for dowry, along with allegations concerning the conduct of the petitioner’s family members. Based on these allegations, interim maintenance was granted by the Trial Court, which was partially modified by the Appellate Court.

Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the High Court contending, inter alia, that no case of domestic violence was made out and that the allegations were false and unsubstantiated.

Court’s Observation

At the outset, the Court noted that the existence of a domestic relationship between the parties was undisputed. It was observed that the application filed by the respondent-wife under Section 12 of the PWDV Act contained detailed allegations of cruelty and harassment during the subsistence of the marriage.

The Court emphasised that at the stage of considering interim relief, it is not required to conclusively adjudicate upon the truth or falsity of such allegations. Instead, the inquiry is limited to whether the allegations, on a prima facie reading, disclose acts falling within the statutory definition of domestic violence.

In this context, the Court observed: “Such allegations, if taken at face value, fall within the broad contours of ‘domestic violence’ as defined under the PWDV Act.”

The Court further noted that the allegations included instances of physical assault, verbal abuse, humiliation, and inappropriate conduct within the household, all of which are recognised facets of domestic violence under the statutory framework.

It also referred to the findings of the Appellate Court, which had observed that although the allegations were controverted by the petitioner-husband, they prima facie reflected infliction of domestic violence for the purpose of deciding interim maintenance, and that the issue would require full adjudication during trial.

The Court thus held that the respondent-wife, at this stage, satisfied the requirement of being an “aggrieved person” under Section 2(a) of the PWDV Act, as the allegations of domestic violence were prima facie borne out from the record.

Conclusion

The Court held that the allegations raised by the respondent-wife, when considered at the threshold stage, were sufficient to bring the case within the ambit of “domestic violence” under the PWDV Act and to justify the grant of interim relief.

Accordingly, the Court declined to interfere with the findings of the courts below on this aspect and proceeded to adjudicate the remaining issues in accordance with the law.

Cause Title: Anurag Manohar Kankerwal v. Soham Rani (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:2821)

Click here to read/download Judgment