<p>The Delhi High Court has said that prima facie the protection under the domestic violence law, which aims at protecting married women from cruelty, is not available to a male member of a family particularly the husband.</p>.<p>The high court took into consideration the definition of section 2(a) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act which says that "aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent.</p>.<p>Justice Jasmeet Singh, who was hearing a woman's plea seeking quashing of the complaint filed against her by her husband before a magisterial court here, stayed the proceedings initiated by the man under the provisions of the DV Act.</p>.<p>"In the present case, the respondent, that is, the husband of the petitioner (woman) has initiated proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act. Prima facie it seems in view of Section 2(a), the protection of the Act is not available to a male member of the family and more particularly the husband.</p>.<p>"For the aforesaid reasons, the proceedings in complaint case… pending before the metropolitan magistrate, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing," the high court said while listing the matter for further hearing on February 14.</p>.<p>The high court, in its January 23 order, also issued a notice to the man on the woman's plea.</p>.<p>The counsel representing the woman submitted that the husband of the petitioner has initiated proceedings under the DV Act which is totally contrary to the essence of the Act as well as to section 2(a), which defines "aggrieved person" as a woman.</p>.<p>The counsel contended that the protection of the Act is not available to any male member, and more particularly, the husband.</p>
<p>The Delhi High Court has said that prima facie the protection under the domestic violence law, which aims at protecting married women from cruelty, is not available to a male member of a family particularly the husband.</p>.<p>The high court took into consideration the definition of section 2(a) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act which says that "aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent.</p>.<p>Justice Jasmeet Singh, who was hearing a woman's plea seeking quashing of the complaint filed against her by her husband before a magisterial court here, stayed the proceedings initiated by the man under the provisions of the DV Act.</p>.<p>"In the present case, the respondent, that is, the husband of the petitioner (woman) has initiated proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act. Prima facie it seems in view of Section 2(a), the protection of the Act is not available to a male member of the family and more particularly the husband.</p>.<p>"For the aforesaid reasons, the proceedings in complaint case… pending before the metropolitan magistrate, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing," the high court said while listing the matter for further hearing on February 14.</p>.<p>The high court, in its January 23 order, also issued a notice to the man on the woman's plea.</p>.<p>The counsel representing the woman submitted that the husband of the petitioner has initiated proceedings under the DV Act which is totally contrary to the essence of the Act as well as to section 2(a), which defines "aggrieved person" as a woman.</p>.<p>The counsel contended that the protection of the Act is not available to any male member, and more particularly, the husband.</p>