A wife's right to reside in the shared household can reach her in-laws' house: sections 17 and 19 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

Section 17 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 gives every woman in a domestic relationship a right to reside in the shared household, whether or not she holds any title in it, and section 19 lets a Magistrate pass a residence order once satisfied that domestic violence has taken place. Section 2(s) can reach a house owned by the husband's relatives or his joint family in which she has lived in a domestic relationship, an application under section 12 is to be disposed of, as an endeavour, within sixty days of its first hearing, and an appeal lies to the Court of Session within thirty days.

What does section 17 give, and against whom?

Section 17(1) applies "notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force" and says that every woman in a domestic relationship "shall have the right to reside in the shared household, whether or not she has any right, title or beneficial interest in the same". Section 17(2) adds that the aggrieved person "shall not be evicted or excluded from the shared household or any part of it by the respondent save in accordance with the procedure established by law".

Three terms carry the section. An "aggrieved person" under section 2(a) is a woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and alleges domestic violence by him. A "domestic relationship" under section 2(f) is one between persons who live or have at any point lived together in a shared household, related by consanguinity, marriage, a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption, or as members of a joint family. The "respondent" under section 2(q) is a person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with her and against whom she seeks relief; the words "adult male" in the enacted text were struck down in Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora (2016), so a woman relative can be a respondent.

The right is one of residence, not ownership, and section 17(2) protects it against eviction by the respondent otherwise than by due process.

What is a shared household under section 2(s)?

Section 2(s) covers a household where the aggrieved person lives, or "at any stage has lived", in a domestic relationship, singly or along with the respondent. It includes a household owned or tenanted jointly by her and the respondent, and one owned or tenanted by either of them in which either or both have "any right, title, interest or equity". It also includes a household that "may belong to the joint family of which the respondent is a member, irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right, title or interest in the shared household". The words "at any stage has lived" protect a woman who has been excluded from the house, or is temporarily away, when she applies; Satish Chander Ahuja held they do not make every house where she once stayed with relatives a shared household.

In S.R. Batra v. Taruna Batra (2006) the Supreme Court read the definition narrowly, so that a house belonging to the husband's parents, and not to him or a joint family of which he was a member, was not a shared household. In Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja (Civil Appeal No. 2483 of 2020, 15 October 2020), a bench of three judges overruled that reading. The Court held that the definition is not confined to a house owned or rented by the husband or belonging to his joint family, Specifically, the Court held that the definition cannot be read to mean that a shared household can only be one belonging to a joint family of which the husband is a member or in which he has a share. A house owned by a father-in-law, in which the daughter-in-law has lived in a domestic relationship, can therefore be a shared household.

What can a residence order under section 19 say?

Section 19(1) lets the Magistrate, "while disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12" and "on being satisfied that domestic violence has taken place", pass an order that:

• restrains the respondent from dispossessing or disturbing her possession, "whether or not the respondent has a legal or equitable interest" in the household (clause (a));
• directs the respondent to remove himself from it (clause (b));
• restrains the respondent or any of his relatives from entering any portion in which she resides (clause (c));
• restrains him from alienating, disposing of or encumbering the household, or renouncing his rights in it without leave (clauses (d) and (e)); or
• directs him to secure the same level of alternate accommodation or pay rent for it, "if the circumstances so require" (clause (f)).

The proviso says no order under clause (b) shall be passed against a woman, so a mother-in-law who is a respondent cannot be directed to remove herself. Sub-sections (2) to (8) add conditions for safety, a bond, police protection, obligations for rent and other payments, and the return of stridhan.

How does the Magistrate's procedure run?

An application under section 12(1) may be presented by the aggrieved person, a Protection Officer, or any other person on her behalf. Before passing an order the Magistrate is to take into consideration any domestic incident report from the Protection Officer or a service provider.

Three clocks follow. Under section 12(4) the first hearing "shall not ordinarily be beyond three days from the date of receipt of the application by the court". Under section 13(1) the Protection Officer serves notice of the date on the respondent within a maximum of two days of receipt "or such further reasonable time as may be allowed by the Magistrate". Under section 12(5) the Magistrate "shall endeavour to dispose of every application" within sixty days from the date of its first hearing.

The sixty days begin at the first hearing, not the filing, and the verb is "endeavour": the Act attaches no consequence to a missed period. Section 28(1) applies the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to proceedings under sections 12 and 18 to 23; by section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 that reference now reads as the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Section 28(2) lets the court lay down its own procedure for a section 12 application. Under section 27(1) the Magistrate where she resides or is employed, where the respondent resides, or where the cause of action arose is competent, and under section 27(2) an order is enforceable throughout India.

What do Protection Officers do?

Section 8(1) requires the State Government to appoint Protection Officers in each district, and section 8(2) requires them, as far as possible, to be women. Under section 9(1) the officer makes the domestic incident report and forwards it to the police station and service providers, makes an application for a protection order if she wishes, ensures legal aid, arranges a shelter home or a medical examination if she needs one, and sees that monetary relief under section 20 is complied with. Under section 9(2) the officer works under the Magistrate's control and supervision.

What can a Magistrate do before the final order?

Section 23(1) allows "such interim order as he deems just and proper" in any proceeding under the Act. Section 23(2) adds that where an application "prima facie discloses" that the respondent is committing or has committed an act of domestic violence, or may commit one, the Magistrate may grant an ex parte order on the aggrieved person's affidavit under section 18, 19, 20, 21 or 22. Residence relief is therefore available before the respondent is heard.

The threshold differs by stage: a final section 19 order needs the Magistrate to be "satisfied that domestic violence has taken place", while an ex parte order needs only a prima facie case or a likelihood. Breach of a protection order or an interim protection order is an offence under section 31, punishable with up to one year, a fine up to INR 20,000, or both. Section 31 does not name a residence order.

What does the timeline look like?

An illustration. The dates and parties are hypothetical. The periods are those in the sections named.

Tuesday 2 March 2027     Application under section 12 received by the court
By Thursday 4 March 2027 Notice of the hearing date served through the
                         Protection Officer, within two days of its receipt
                         or such further time as allowed (section 13(1))
By Friday 5 March 2027   First hearing, ordinarily within three days
                         (section 12(4)); ex parte interim order possible
                         on affidavit (section 23(2))
Tuesday 4 May 2027       Sixty days from the first hearing: the date by
                         which the Magistrate is to endeavour to dispose of
                         the application (section 12(5))
Wednesday 19 May 2027    Final order served on the later of the two parties
Friday 18 June 2027      Thirty days from service: last day to appeal to the
                         Court of Session (section 29)

Section 29 runs the thirty days "from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate is served on the aggrieved person or the respondent, as the case may be, whichever is later".

What if the house belongs to the in-laws, or is sold?

Where the household belongs to the husband's parents, the answer turns on section 2(s) as read in Satish Chander Ahuja. She must show that she lived there in a domestic relationship; the parents' title does not by itself take the house outside the definition. Section 19(1)(c) lets the Magistrate restrain "any of his relatives" from entering the portion where she resides.

Where the household is sold, section 19(1)(d) and (e) restrain the respondent from alienating or encumbering it or renouncing his rights in it. Under section 3, Explanation I, clause (iv)(b), alienation of assets in which the aggrieved person has an interest or is entitled to use by virtue of the domestic relationship is economic abuse, and clause (iv)(c) treats restriction of access to the shared household the same way; a sale in breach of a clause (d) restraint is a breach by the respondent. Where the husband is a non-resident Indian, section 27(1) lets the Magistrate where she resides or where the cause of action arose act, and section 27(2) makes the order enforceable throughout India.

What remains unsettled?

Four points.

Whether a residence order can bind a stranger to the proceeding. The orders in section 19(1) are framed against the respondent and his relatives. A buyer from an owner who is not a respondent is not mentioned, and the Act does not say what follows if the household passes to a third party without notice of the proceeding.

What the sixty days of section 12(5) mean in practice. The text is an endeavour with no stated consequence, and it does not say whether the period can be extended or how it sits with the counselling period in section 14.

Which orders are appealable under section 29. The section speaks of "the order made by the Magistrate" without limiting it to a final order, so the position on interim orders under section 23 is not stated.

How far a civil court's decree on title overrides a subsisting section 19 order. Satish Chander Ahuja holds that a section 19 order does not bar a civil suit about the same house, that the order is relevant evidence there, and that the civil court decides on the evidence before it; it does not say how the Magistrate's order is to be varied once a decree is passed.