You are currently viewing PRABHA TYAGI V. KAMLESH DEVI



COURT: The Supreme Court of India

CORAM: Justice BV Nagarathna

DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 12 March 2022


The appellant married Kuldeep Tyagi (deceased) on 18.6.2005 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Following the wedding, the appellant resided with his family members at her husband’s ancestral house. On 15.7.2005, her husband met a car accident and scummed to his injuries. As a result of mistreatment and abuse by her matrimonial family after her husband’s death, she relocated to Dehradun. The appellant approached the SJM under section 12 to protect her right over her husband’s property and to seek compensation under the D.V. Act.


While bringing the substantive provisions of Sections 18 to 20 and 22 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is it necessary to consider the Domestic Incidence Report?

Whether the aggrieved and the person against whom the relief is sought should be in a subsisting domestic relationship?


Judgment passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand and Ad. Sessions Judge is set aside. The appeal is allowed. The Hon’ble Apex Court lays down that under the terms Section 12 of the D.V. Act, a Magistrate is qualified to issue an ex-parte, interim, or a final order even in the absence of a Domestic Incident Report and a woman, who suffers or has suffered domestic abuse, can seek remedies under the D.V. Act, including the enforcement of her right to live in a shared home, if she has the right to do so under Section 17 of the D.V. Act. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Court has interpreted the subsisting ‘domestic relationship’ broadly and expansively and stated that a domestic relationship doesn’t have to exist when an aggrieved person files an application under section 12 of the D.V. act.

Leave a Reply