Under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, a complaint can be maintained against a daughter-in-law, but only where she is named as a co-respondent along with an adult male member of the family who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved woman. If no adult male member of the family is made a respondent, a complaint against the daughter-in-law alone is not maintainable under the Act.
That position was settled by the Supreme Court in 2016, when it struck down the words "adult male" from the definition of a respondent. In practice it means a mother-in-law who says her son and his wife together subjected her to domestic violence can bring both of them before the Magistrate. She cannot bring only the daughter-in-law, or only a sister-in-law or a daughter, before the court under this Act.
Who is an aggrieved person and who is a respondent
The Act is a civil-protection law rather than a criminal one. It works through two defined roles. The aggrieved person is any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges that she has been subjected to domestic violence. A domestic relationship covers relations by blood, marriage or adoption, a relationship in the nature of marriage, and family members living or having lived together in a shared household.
A shared household is central to the Act. The parties must have lived together at some point in a household, whether owned or rented, and whether or not the woman has any right, title or interest in it. That last point matters in joint-family homes, where a daughter-in-law may have no title of her own and yet is protected because she lived in the household. Without the element of living together, the Act generally does not apply at all.
The respondent is the person against whom relief is sought. As originally drafted, the Act defined a respondent as an adult male person, with a narrow proviso that allowed a woman to be a respondent where she was in a relationship in the nature of marriage. That restricted wording was the source of years of argument about whether a woman could ever be a respondent.
The 2016 Supreme Court ruling
In Hiral P. Harsora and Others v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora and Others, decided in 2016, the Supreme Court read the Act as a whole and struck down the words "adult male person" from the definition of respondent. The Court reasoned that limiting the respondent to adult males defeated the object of the Act, because a woman can suffer violence at the hands of a female relative who shares the same household, such as a daughter-in-law, a sister-in-law or a sister.
The Court, however, drew a clear line. It held that a complaint against a daughter-in-law, daughter or sister is maintainable where they are co-respondents in a complaint against an adult male person who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the complainant. It went on to hold that a complaint is not maintainable against a daughter-in-law, sister-in-law or sister of the complainant if no complaint is filed against any adult male member of the family.
The judgment is therefore both an expansion and a limit. It expanded who can be sued, and at the same time made the presence of an adult male respondent the condition on which the expansion depends. Reading only the first half of the ruling leads to the mistake of filing against a female relative alone.
The condition in plain terms
The following table sets out how the rule works in the situations that come up most often.
| Who is named as respondent | Maintainable |
|---|---|
| Husband and his wife together, against a mother-in-law | Yes, both may be respondents |
| Daughter-in-law alone, with no adult male respondent | No |
| Husband's sister or sister-in-law alone | No |
| Husband, his mother and his sister together | Yes, the female relatives as co-respondents |
The point is not whether the daughter-in-law is a woman. The point is whether there is an adult male respondent in the case. The presence of that adult male respondent is what makes the female co-respondents answerable under the Act.
What counts as domestic violence under the Act
Domestic violence under the Act is wider than physical assault. It covers any act, omission or conduct that harms or injures the aggrieved woman, and the statute lists several forms.
- physical abuse, such as beating, slapping or any use of force;
- sexual abuse, including forced or coerced sexual acts;
- verbal and emotional abuse, such as insults, humiliation, name-calling and repeated threats;
- economic abuse, such as depriving the woman of money, refusing to pay maintenance, or disposing of her assets;
- any conduct that creates a risk to the woman's health, safety or well-being.
Because the definition is broad, a complaint can rest on a pattern of conduct rather than a single injury. But the conduct must still be tied to a domestic relationship, and the application should describe it specifically rather than in general terms. A vague assertion that the household treated the woman badly is much weaker than a dated account of what each respondent did.
How the complaint should be framed
Because the rule turns on who is named, the framing of the complaint matters as much as the facts. A well-drafted application under the Act usually states the following.
- the name and address of the aggrieved woman, and her relationship with each respondent;
- the fact of the shared household, and where and when the parties lived together;
- the adult male respondent against whom the primary allegations are made;
- the female relatives, such as the daughter-in-law or sister-in-law, who are joined as co-respondents, with the specific acts attributed to each;
- specific incidents of physical, verbal, emotional or economic abuse, with dates as far as they are known;
- the reliefs sought, such as a protection order, a residence order or monetary relief.
If the draft names only a female respondent, it invites dismissal at the threshold. A review of the cause title before filing avoids that outcome. The same review should confirm that every respondent named is actually linked to the shared household and the incidents described.
Documents and evidence to keep ready
A domestic violence application is dealt with at the first stage on affidavits and documents, so a paper trail helps. Useful material includes:
- proof of the domestic relationship, such as a marriage certificate or a record of the shared household;
- proof of residence, such as a rent agreement, electricity bill or voter card;
- medical records, if there was physical injury;
- any complaints made to the police, with the acknowledgement;
- messages, photographs or witness details that support specific incidents;
- details of income and assets where monetary relief is sought.
The list is not exhaustive, and not every case will have all of it. What matters is that the application is consistent with the documents attached to it, because contradictions between the two are the easiest ground for the other side to attack.
Forum, procedure and reliefs
An application is made to the Judicial Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate having jurisdiction over the place where the aggrieved woman resides or where the cause of action arose. The application is filed under Section 12 of the Act. A woman may also approach a Protection Officer or a service provider, who can record the domestic incident and help file the application. In many districts of West Bengal the Protection Officer works from the office of the District Social Welfare Officer.
Once the complaint is admitted, the Magistrate can pass a range of orders. These include a protection order under Section 18, a residence order under Section 19, monetary relief under Section 20, a custody order under Section 21, and compensation under Section 22. Relief is protective rather than punitive; the object is the safety of the aggrieved woman, not punishment in the criminal sense.
How this differs from a criminal cruelty complaint
The Domestic Violence Act is a civil law that provides protection, residence and monetary relief. A separate criminal remedy exists for cruelty by a husband or his relatives. Before 1 July 2024 that offence was Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code; after the new criminal codes came into force on that date, the corresponding provision is Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The two routes serve different purposes and can run alongside each other. A domestic violence application asks the Magistrate for protection and support; a cruelty complaint sets the criminal law in motion, with investigation by the police. Which route, or which combination, is appropriate depends on the facts, and the decision should be taken with advice rather than by filing both automatically.
Practical cautions and limitations
The condition laid down by the Supreme Court is a real bar, not a technicality. If a woman has a grievance against a daughter-in-law but no complaint against any adult male member of the family, the proper remedy may lie elsewhere, such as a civil suit for injunction or damages, rather than under this Act. An application that fails at the threshold wastes time and costs.
It also follows that the Act protects women and cannot be used by a male relative to sue a daughter-in-law under its umbrella. Anyone considering a complaint should place the full facts, including who else must be joined, before a lawyer at the drafting stage.
If your matter involves a domestic violence complaint or a family dispute, see our services or book a free consultation. Related reading: how to become a divorce lawyer in India and the legal blog.