Bombay High Court Rules Sister-in-law Living Separately Cannot Be Implicated in Domestic Violence Case for Mere Visits to Shared Household

In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court observed, “Mere visits of the Petitioner to the shared household being devoid of any permanency is not sufficient and adequate to constitute residence in shared household,” thus setting aside an order implicating a sister-in-law in a domestic violence case.

The central legal issue revolved around the interpretation of ‘domestic relationship’ and ‘shared household’ under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act). The court had to determine whether a sister-in-law, residing separately but occasionally visiting the shared household, could be implicated under the D.V. Act.

Mrs. Kinjal Jayesh Mehta, the petitioner, challenged an order by the Sessions Court that implicated her in a domestic violence case filed by her sister-in-law, Mrs. Disha Jimit Sanghvi. Sanghvi had filed an application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act, implicating her husband, mother-in-law, unmarried brother-in-law, and Mehta. The Metropolitan Magistrate initially dismissed the application against Mehta, leading to the appeal.

Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh meticulously analyzed the definitions of ‘domestic relationship’ and ‘shared household’ under the D.V. Act. She highlighted that for a ‘domestic relationship’ to exist, the parties must have lived together in a shared household at some point. In Mehta’s case, she had never resided in the shared household, thus lacking a ‘domestic relationship’ with Sanghvi.

The Court referred to various precedents, notably "Prabha Tyagi v. Kamlesh Devi” and “Rashmi Mehrotra and Anr.”, to elucidate the concept of shared household and domestic relationship. It was emphasized that mere daily visits to the shared household do not constitute living in it or a domestic relationship.

The Bombay High Court quashed the Sessions Court’s order and reinstated the Metropolitan Magistrate’s decision, absolving Mehta from the domestic violence case. The Court clarified that visiting a shared household without permanent residence does not establish a ‘domestic relationship’ under the D.V. Act.

 Date of Decision: February 14, 2024

Kinjal Jayesh Mehta vs Disha Jimit Sanghvi And Anr