Judgment Finds Lack of Evidence and Perversity in Domestic Violence Allegations Against Bhaskar Reddy
In a significant legal development, the Karnataka High Court has overturned previous rulings by lower courts that had found Bhaskar Reddy guilty of domestic violence against his daughter, Ms. Roshini, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The High Court, presided over by Justice Ravi V Hosmani, ruled that the findings of domestic violence were not substantiated by evidence and deemed them perverse.
The case arose from allegations made by Ms. Roshini, represented by her grandmother Ramadevi, claiming sexual abuse and domestic violence by her father. The lower courts had awarded Ms. Roshini protection against domestic violence, monthly maintenance, and compensation. However, the High Court found the judgments of the lower courts relied excessively on the absence of cross-examination of the respondent, Bhaskar Reddy, and failed to take into account significant evidentiary gaps.
Justice Hosmani noted that the definition of 'aggrieved person' under the Domestic Violence Act includes daughters living in a domestic relationship, irrespective of their age, if domestic violence is established. Nonetheless, allegations must be substantiated with clear evidence, which was lacking in this case. The judgment emphasized that failure to appear for cross-examination by the respondent does not automatically establish acts of domestic violence, and adverse inference should only be drawn in the context of corroborated evidence.
The High Court scrutinized the evidence presented and found the claims of domestic violence lacked material support. The allegations were contradicted by the absence of corroborative evidence and were further undermined by the acquittal of Bhaskar Reddy in associated criminal cases, including a POCSO case. The judgment noted that the findings of the lower courts were contrary to the evidence on record, leading to the conclusion that the respondent had not committed any acts of domestic violence.
This ruling highlights the importance of evidence-based judgments in cases of domestic violence and sets a precedent for future cases where the absence of cross-examination cannot be the sole basis for adverse findings. The High Court's decision underscores the necessity of detailed and specific evidence to support allegations, ensuring that justice is grounded in fact rather than presumption.
Bottom Line:
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Relief under Section 12 by minor daughter - Definition of 'aggrieved person' under Section 2(a) includes daughters, irrespective of their age, for invoking provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, if domestic violence is established. However, findings of domestic violence must be based on evidence and cannot solely rely on the absence of cross-examination by the respondent.
Statutory provision(s): Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Sections 2(a), 2(f), 3, 12, 18, 19, 20, 22; Evidence Act, 1872 Section 145
Sri Bhaskar Reddy v. Ms. Roshini, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2845941
