Home / Crime and Justice / Court Upholds Wife's Right to Choose Domestic Violence Forum

Court Upholds Wife's Right to Choose Domestic Violence Forum

Summary

  • Bombay High Court imposes ₹1 lakh cost on husband
  • Wife has choice to file domestic violence case in magistrate's court
  • Husband's plea to transfer case to family court rejected
Court Upholds Wife's Right to Choose Domestic Violence Forum

On October 6, 2025, the Bombay High Court rejected a husband's plea to transfer a domestic violence case from a magistrate's court to the family court where divorce proceedings are pending. The High Court imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on the husband, which he must pay to his estranged wife.

The High Court noted that the wife has three other proceedings filed before the magistrate, including a criminal complaint of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and a case for alleged perjury. The husband had filed for divorce in the family court.

The High Court, in its order, referred to Supreme Court rulings that state the convenience of the wife must be the primary consideration when dealing with transfer proceedings, given the socio-economic paradigm in Indian society. The court also noted that the transfer of domestic violence proceedings to the family court is permissible, but if the transfer plea is not bona fide, it can be rejected on a case-by-case basis.

The High Court ultimately ruled that the wife's choice of forum to file domestic violence proceedings must be upheld, and the husband's plea to transfer the case was rejected.

Disclaimer: This story has been auto-aggregated and auto-summarised by a computer program. This story has not been edited or created by the Feedzop team.
The Bombay High Court ruled that it is only the wife who has the choice of selecting the forum to file domestic violence proceedings.
The Bombay High Court imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on the husband, which he must pay to his estranged wife.
The High Court noted that the wife has three other proceedings filed before the magistrate, including a criminal complaint and a case for alleged perjury, making the husband's argument of conflicting judgments invalid.

Read more news on