“The object and purpose of the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act 2005 are to provide more effective protection of the right of the women guaranteed who is victims of violence of any kind that occurs within the family. Therefore, while interpreting the definition of the aggrieved person in tune with the object and purpose of the Act, such definition needs to be interpreted with the broadest possible terms”, the court held – Mumbai High Court
The Mumbai High Court’s ruling regarding the Domestic Violence Act 2005 emphasizes the need for an inclusive interpretation of the term “aggrieved person” in order to provide effective protection for all individuals experiencing violence within the family.
This recent decision focuses on the rights of transgender women who have undergone sex reassignment surgery. According to the linked article from LiveLaw, the court has ruled that a transgender woman who has undergone sex reassignment surgery can be considered an “aggrieved person” under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court stated that the Act’s objective is to protect the rights of women who are victims of domestic violence, and thus the definition of “aggrieved person” should be interpreted in the broadest possible terms.
This ruling is significant because it highlights the importance of providing protection to transgender women, who often face discrimination and violence in various aspects of their lives. By interpreting the Domestic Violence Act 2005 more inclusively, the Mumbai High Court has taken a progressive step in ensuring the rights and safety of transgender women in India.
The Protection of Women from Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, commonly known as the POSH Act, is aimed at providing a safe working environment for women and addressing instances of sexual harassment at the workplace.
While the POSH Act specifically focuses on the protection of women, the Mumbai High Court’s recent ruling on the Domestic Violence Act 2005 provides a strong indication that there is a shift towards inclusivity in the interpretation of laws.
The Mumbai High Court’s ruling emphasizes the importance of interpreting legal provisions in the broadest possible terms to provide effective protection for all individuals experiencing violence or harassment, regardless of their gender identity. This progressive interpretation of the Domestic Violence Act 2005 could serve as a catalyst for a more inclusive approach to other laws, such as the POSH Act.
Although the POSH Act does not currently extend its protection to transgender individuals or male employees, the High Court’s interpretation of the Domestic Violence Act may encourage lawmakers and courts to revisit and broaden the scope of the POSH Act in the future. This would help ensure that all individuals, including transgender individuals and male employees, are provided with a safe and harassment-free working environment.
