Understanding Domestic Violence With a Focus on Male Victimhood

Author: Naimisha Mishra, ILS Law College, Pune.

The Indian legal literature relating to domestic violence largely reflects biased ideologies that are based on traditional constructs of the society which view men as aggressors and women as victims with a reduced scope for exceptions. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA-2005) only exacerbates this bias, instilling a narrow view of domestic abuse into the provisions of law, that simply rejects catering to the protection of male and transgender victims. Although such a narrative does stem from imbalances in the position of power between men and women throughout history, its limitations have become increasingly prevalent with the evolution of society. This article aims to critique the PWDVA’s gender-specific provisions and investigates international models where gender-neutral legislation ensures protections for all victims in an inclusive manner. The article submits that India’s domestic violence laws are in a critical need for substantive reforms, through scrutinizing judicial precedents, socio-economic demographic realities, and comparing international legal models, It is only through transcending traditional gender prejudices that the legal system would be able to offer a fair and just framework that genuinely safeguards all individuals from domestic violence, in all of its forms. This article pursues a substantive contribution to the establishment of equity in Indian legislations, through advocacy for gender-neutral laws, thereby primarily challenging the persisting stigma that obstructs a comprehensive understanding of victimhood in a social and legal context.

Domestic Violence, legal reforms, male victimhood, gender-neutral laws, PWDVA 2005, aggrieved person, Section 2(a)

In the prehistoric age, gendered roles were rather clearly defined. The ancestral man was responsible for hunting, and had to embody aggression, assertion and strength, with little to no scope for the man to be vulnerable. However times have changed now, and humanity has evolved, but it is arguable that this ‘evolution’ of humanity is rather arbitrary, because although back then men were traditionally expected to be ‘tough’ and emotionally restrained, it appears that those qualities have followed men to this present era, where quintessential ideas of masculinity still reinforce those primal constructs, which not only have social but also legal repercussions. 

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA)-2005, an imperative legislation, though vital, further homes this bias. While the Act plays an indispensable role in protecting female victims, it reflects a narrow view of almost seeing violence as a purely gendered experience, assuming both men and women as defaulters but only women as victims. This narrow stance raises a profound question: in a society religiously committed to equality, why is there an absence of a mechanism granting relief to victims of all genders? By embodying a fixated approach to victimhood, these laws inadvertently marginalize men as also potential victims of abuse. This article argues for an inclusive framework that acknowledges victimhood in all its possibilities.

The PWDVA was passed in a context where the vulnerabilities of women, and the dangerously innate bias against them, largely owing to patriarchy, was acknowledged, the implementation of the act was without a doubt, indispensable. In the Indian society, women are traditionally viewed as compliant and expected to be accommodating, which is a major reason why a large percentage of domestic violence cases go undocumented, and even though 30% of women statistically, according to survey conducted by the government of India and 84% if we rely upon a survey lead by a private organization, experience abuse that may be social, physical, economic or otherwise, are inherently expected to comply. The PWDVA was therefore a much-needed response to the insidious problem of domestic violence in India. 

However, the narrow focus of the act on viewing victimhood as solely experienced by women, completely and unjustifiably sidelines the notion that the victim may be anyone, irrespective of their gender, and although the foundational basis of the patriarchy favours men, there is an adequate percentage of men who go through domestic violence themselves and it is important that the law does not fail in its duty to protect them too, merely because they constitute a smaller percentage in comparison to women. A smaller percentage still constitutes a percentage-and downplaying domestic violence cases against men as just ‘numbers’, not yet significant enough to have their own laws for protection, largely dehumanises their traumatic experience, and may be seen as a repetition of history when women were not paid heed to when they faced the same.

In Aruna Parmod Shah v. Union of India, the Delhi High Court stated:“We do not rule out the possibility of a man becoming the victim of domestic violence, but such cases would be few and far between, thus, not requiring or justifying the protection of Parliament.” Here, the Court, while recognizing the possibility of domestic violence against men, disengaged from facilitating the protection of these victims on the grounds of mere limited cases. 

 In the 2016 case of Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora , the Supreme Court struck down the words “adult male” from the definition of “respondent” in Section 2(q) of the PWDVA, 2005. Before the following case, the impugned section allowed the aggrieved to file a case only against ‘adult male relatives’ with whom the aggrieved person shared a ‘domestic relationship’. Post the Harsora case, an aggrieved female could file a case against other female relatives. In this case, the Supreme Court reasoned that the Act aimed to prevent any kind of domestic violence therefore stating that a limited definition of ‘respondent’ under the act, stood in contradiction to its purpose. This judgement was one step closer to establishing a gender-neutral legislation, by recognizing that the abuser could be anyone. 

In a society where masculinity is still synonymous with emotional resilience and invulnerability, the path to gender neutrality, in its most authentic sense, is still paved with societal and legal challenges.

Men who face domestic violence not only deal with societal stigma, as speaking up and confrontation would be viewed as fragility, their cause also lacks sufficient legal recourse to grant them relief, which more often than not, leads to them having to experience their agony silently.

As a result, a lack of vital legislature in the Indian legal system, for the protection of a vast majority of abuse victims, serves as a gut-wrenching reminder of the Law failing to perform its duty of equal justice.

A study conducted by the Indian Journal of Community Medicine brings into light the domestic violence faced by men in rural India and the social, psychological and economic factors affecting the same. The study reinforces the unsettling reality that although female domestic violence cases are prosecuted and brought into media attention, a large majority of domestic violence cases experienced by men remain undocumented and disregarded.

The study surveyed 1,000 married men between the ages of 21 and 49, using a modified Conflict Tactics Scale to deduct various forms of abuse experienced by the male participants. The results strongly contradict conventional narratives surrounding domestic violence. According to the study, 52.4% of men reported experiencing some form of gender-based violence. 51.5% of these men suffered abuse by their spouses or partners at least once in their lifetime, with 10.5% experiencing such violence within the previous 12 months. Emotional abuse prevailed as most common affecting 51.6% of the participants, followed by physical violence, affecting 6%.Severe physical assaults occurred in one tenth of the cases.

The study also highlighted certain factors that affected the risk that was associated with higher abuse rates against men. Some of these factors such as lower income, education levels standing at middle school, nuclear family arrangements contributed to high rates of abuse against men. Further, cases where the aggressor was under the influence of alcohol also lead to a higher risk of committing abuse. 

These inferences bring into light the urgent necessity of recognizing male participants as victims of domestic abuse too. Even as society continues and the legal system continues to channel their undivided attention towards protecting women, the study highlights the importance of acknowledging and paying heed to male victimhood as well. When constantly disregarded, male victims are left without recourse for obtaining relief, which only results in reinforcing unhealthy stereotypes of masculinity that prohibit any form of showing susceptibility.

The results of the study put forward an urgent call for a highly overdue investigation and a reformed, broader approach to domestic violence laws in India. The legal system can only transcend gender biased laws by extending equal mechanisms for protection to all victims, fostering an inclusive framework for remedy.

In exploring international stances on domestic violence, several countries are rather progressive in their approach towards the nuances of domestic violence by enacting and implementing gender neutral laws that acknowledge and recognize male victimhood. These examples highlight the imperative of extending legal protections to all victims, regardless of gender.

A number of states in the United States have implemented gender-neutral legal frameworks that recognize men as potential victims of domestic abuse. The National Domestic Violence Hotline, among other organizations, supports male victims, acknowledging and guiding them through their experiences.

Next, in the United Kingdom, the legal system’s gender-neutral stance promotes a growing awareness of male victimization, with organizations like Mankind Initiative providing adequate resources to cater to the needs and advocacy for men.

In Canada, there have been steps taken towards a gender-neutral approach. The Canadian Centre for Men and Families serves as a notable example of an organization offering support services.

In Australia, domestic violence laws are also gender-neutral, and initiatives like the One in Three Campaign actively engage in decoding and disrupting stereotypes that prevent male victims from seeking help.

Similarly Sweden’s gender-neutral approach not only reflects in the legal framework but is reinforced by a large magnitude of support services for all victims, encouraging male victims to report abuse.

With India dealing with the shortcomings of its own, gender-specific laws, these examples suggest a solution, one that addresses the needs of all victims, and a judicial system that guarantees protection for the same. Enacting these solutions would be a pivotal shift for India in overcoming its dangerous stereotypes and fostering indispensable equity in its legality.

A metamorphic shift in India’s approach to domestic violence requires comprehensive judicial and legislative policy reforms that disrupt sociological and psychological barriers and underscore the importance of a shift in the overall ideology. First, establishing support systems that are inclusive towards men and transgender persons, such as state-funded homes and shelters, and helplines aiding to the victims. Government-backed initiatives can bridge the gap where private organizations lack, providing funding and offering all forms of resources for all victims.

Furthermore, moving towards a complete shift to gender neutrality in all its manifestations would be the inclusion of men and transgender persons in the definition of an “aggrieved person” as defined in Section 2(a) of the PWDVA 2005, would more comprehensively fulfil the object of the Act of protection of victims against domestic violence, in all its forms.

The accomplishment of a truly inclusive legal framework requires a multifaceted approach that not only preserves the essential protections for women, but also extends legal protection to all the victims. 

Social awareness drives aimed at sensitizing and making the public aware of the existence of the less talked about, but strongly prevalent domestic violence against men, can also play a pivotal role in spreading awareness and educating the victims about the reliefs they can sought after. Involving counsellors and legal experts in these campaigns can foster a better learning environment further facilitating the accomplishment of the final goal of gender neutrality. Such efforts would result in an ideological and cultural shift, normalizing the notion that men and non-binary individuals can also be victims of abuse, and this cultural shift in the society could enhance the process through which the legality of the subject would be reformed to incorporate a more comprehensive context.

A major concern in advocating for gender-neutral domestic violence laws is the potential for misuse and although false accusations pose a genuine issue, they do not override the overwhelming need for legal reforms in any case. Through the implementation of stricter mechanisms, procedures and protocols, such as an enhanced scrutiny of cases, and an evidence- based approach to verify allegations, the risk of misuse that only obstructs the path to justice could be tackled effectively. However, the mere risk must not be taken as a cue to not investigate any such cases.

In a notable case of Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India (2005), the Supreme Court stated that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was increasingly being misused for personal vendetta, reinstating that this could be a "new form of legal terrorism." 

In a 2017 judgment, the Bombay High Court ruled that filing a false dowry case constitutes cruelty by the wife and could be grounds for divorce. In the landmark case Rajesh Sharma & Others v. State of U.P. (2017), the Supreme Court directed that no arrests can be made under Section 498A without the verification of the allegations first. Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit, here, highlighted the increasing misuse of the section, stating that many complaints are filed in bad faith. 

Therefore, by implementing stringent mechanisms and encouraging a rigorous standard for all claims, the judicial system can aim to strike a perfect balance, such that no victim is left disregarded, nor is an innocent person punished redundantly.

The importance of the implementation of gender-neutral domestic abuse laws in India stems from society’s biased and gendered approaches towards abuse. Through actively participating in the view that domestic violence is solely exclusive to women, the legal system not only inadvertently reinforces archaic notions of masculinity, but in addition to that, it also restrains the victims of such abuse from getting access to relief, effectively disregarding their experiences while ironically affirming equal protection for all.

Comparative analysis reveals that international models have transformed their domestic violence frameworks to reflect a more inclusive definition of abuse. These countries demonstrate that historically vulnerable groups can be protected while also simultaneously extending relief to other demographics such that they do not have to suffer without an available recourse. The Indian judiciary’s occasional recognition of male victimhood, as stated in notable judgments, reflects the system’s awareness of these gaps, yet there is still a lack of legal reforms implemented to bridge the same.

The implementation of gender-neutral domestic violence laws in India would not only uphold the true notions of justice but also grant vulnerable individuals the right to dignity and to seek judicial recourse, signalling a critical shift to a sociological and legal framework that fosters equity and extends protection to all.

1.Soumya Sharma,What About The Men Who Face Domestic Violence, JCLJ,4(2022).

2. Dr. Shreshth Bhatnagar & Ms. Yutika Bhatnagar, An Exploration Of Men's Rights In India: A Critical Analysis Of Legal Protections And Gender Equality, IJCRT,8(2024).

3. Dr Navpreet Kaur, Domestic Violence Against Men in India: A Critical Analysis with Special Reference to Indian Law, Vol. 22 - No. 1 South India Journal of Social Sciences,1,5 (2024).

4.Dr Helen Fisher, WHY MEN DON’T CRY, Helen Fisher(2024), https://helenfisher.com/why-men-dont-cry/

5. University of Delaware, Challenging prehistoric gender roles: Research finds that women were hunters, too, Science Daily,(Oct. 20,2023),  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/10/231020145921.htm

6. Malik et al, A Cross-sectional Study of Gender-Based Violence against Men in the Rural Area of Haryana, India, Indian Journal of Community Medicine, 44(1), 35-38, (Jan–Mar 2019).

7. Khan Global Studies, Men’s Rights In India: Legal Perspectives and Challenges, Khan Global Studies(Nov. 5,2024) https://www.khanglobalstudies.com/blog/men-rights-in-india/