Unheard and Unseen: The Legal Silence Around Male Victims of Domestic Violence – A Call for Gender-Inclusive Reform

Abstract

Within India, domestic violence (DV) is a serious gender-biased issue-mostly in favor of female victims, as stated in the 2005 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA). This very limited approach thereby legally renders male victims invisible, despite the viable proof in increasing frequency of their victimization. Studies show that men are also victims of physical, emotional, and financial abuse when they are denied support from the system due to socio-legal bias. The absence of gender-neutral laws aggravates their condition, as it provides no support system or legal recourse.

The near-complete denial of rights and legal remedies to male DV victims in India emanates from the antiquated stereotypes linking masculinity to immunity. On one hand, the laws meant to protect women are undoubtedly of great relevance; however, on the other hand, their limitation of application amounts to a perpetuation of inequality and a contravention to Article 14’s guarantee of equality. Judicial opinion, such as that in Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora (2016), expands the definition of “respondent” for the application of the PWDVA but still ignores male victimization. Male complaints are often marginalized, police dismiss them on sight, and when presented with shelters, they will not cater to their needs.

An overhaul in legislative framework is therefore necessary. The UK and US have taken gender-neutral approaches to their domestic violence laws, offering protection irrespective of sex-an appropriate model for India in amending the PWDVA or legislating a new law to acknowledge male victims. Equally crucial is the sensitization of law enforcement to deal with prejudiced gender stereotypes hindering impartial action.

In this paper, the authors endeavor to prove that the legitimatization of male victims of domestic violence amounts to subversion upon justice and equality. Gender-neutral provisions would allow India to align its law with constitutional principles and standards of international human rights with respect to all survivors, regardless of gender.

Keywords: Domestic Violence, Male Victims, Gender-Neutral Laws, Indian Penal Code, Legal Reform, Section 498A.

Introduction

Background and Context

Domestic violence (DV) is a complex social issue straddling many gender lines yet has largely been conceived as a gender-specific problem in the discourses of law and society. According to the United Nations, domestic violence refers to a pattern of behavior in any relationship that is used to gain or maintain power and control over an intimate partner. It includes physical, sexual, emotional, economic, and psychological abuse. Although there have been clear advances in the recognition of DV across the world over the past decades, the story remains as one centoundedly directed at female victims, thus making for their systemic erasure from the narratives of male victimization.

It is this gender-based approach that is reflected in India’s lone legislation on DV, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA)[1], 2005.Though Section 3 of the Act uses a broad definition of domestic violence, which includes physical, verbal, emotional, sexual, and economic abuses, this is true for the Act’s very title and very provisions that at the same time limit protection to women only, hence strengthening the societal stereotypes that men are confined into being portrayed as only perpetrators and not possible victims. This legislation, while common to many such laws, runs parallel with general thoughts of society identifying masculinity with invulnerability and dominance thus preventing a male victim from seeking help.

Research worldwide has proven that male victims are not as recognized in domestic situations as they should be. According to the 2019 Crime Survey for England and Wales, one in three victims of domestic violence is male. The same trend holds in the United States, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)[2] indicating that one in four men faces some sort of intimate partner violence in his lifetime. According to the Personal Safety Survey of Australia, conducted in 2021, 1 in 6 men had physical or sexual violence from a current or former partner since the age of 15. Undeniably, all these figures question the current gender binary in domestic violence discourse and thus point to widely held social assumptions.

The Indian situation starkly juxtaposes such global realities. The National Family Health Survey-5 (2019-21)[3] reported 29.3 % married Indian men to have been victims of spousal violence, although the comparable figure for women was 32 %; there are no legislative measures in place for male victims of spousal violence. NGOs like Save Family Foundation and the Men’s Rights Association have chronicled thousands of cases where men suffer physical violence, emotional abuse, financial exploitation, and even sexual coercion in a marriage. Aside from these cases, however, most people remain unaware of the situation concerning them.

Statement of the Problem

The explicit gender limitation of PWDVA results in multiplicity of injustice to male victims. As would be demonstrated in the course of the research, the PWDVA cannot make all the available remedies of protection orders, residence orders, or any other remedies open to male victims, similarly, Section 498A of the IPC defines cruelty by a husband or relatives of the husband but does not contain any such provisions whereby cruelty by wives can be defined and got punished. Thus, one creates a paradoxical state within which the same abusive behavior becomes either criminalized or ignored entirely, depending solely on the gender of the perpetrator.

Challenges of description of the extent of the problem in practical terms are dire consequences. Male victims approaching law enforcement agencies only invite ridicule or even outright refusal to register their complaints. A 2019 report by Mumbai Police revealed that only 10 FIRs had been registered among 1,100 complaints lodged by men against domestic abuse. Similarly, the judiciary shows systemic bias against male victims; courts typically reject their petitions or apply harsher standards of evidence than for those with female complainants.

These kinds of stigmas exist over and above the barriers caused by the law. Deep-rooted masculine notions insist that men are expected to be strong and invulnerable, thus rendering it socially taboo for men to speak about victimization. A 2022 study by the Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine found that barriers to seeking help for male DVs victims included fear of social emasculation (78%), concerns about not being believed (65%), and worries of losing access to children (59%). Stigma is heightened by media portrayals which predominantly depict men as aggressors and women as victims of domestic violence.

Economic dimensions of male victimization also need attention. While it is indeed correct to focus on the economic independence of women as a significant factor in the prevention of DV, incidents of financial abuse against men – namely, compulsory property transfers, extortionate dowry demands, or exploitation of maintenance laws – remained largely unaddressed within this focus. The 2021 report of the National Commission for Women[4] documented over 4,000 cases in which men have alleged financial exploitation through the misuse of legal provisions, but which do not have parallel legal safeguards.

Research Objectives

This study has four specific objectives that comprehensively evaluate male DV victims’ legal and social invisibility in India.

1. Legal Gap Analysis: To assess the constitutionality of gender-specific DV laws under Articles 14 and 15 critically and analyze how these existing statutes fail male victims both procedurally and substantively.
2. Judicial Response Assessment: To analyze patterns of treatment by the Indian judiciary towards male DV cases with the help of landmark and lower court judgments so as to bring forth systemic biases and procedural hurdles.
3. Comparative Legal Study: To compare and contrast gender-neutral DV laws in other countries such as the UK (Domestic Abuse Act 2021), Canada (Family Law Act), and Australia (Family Violence Protection Act 2008) to glean applicable best practices that may be transferred to the Indian context.
4. Reform Proposal Development: To develop evidence-based and concrete legislative and policy recommendations in favor of male victim recognition, including amendments to PWDVA, new gender-neutral laws, and institutional safeguards against misuse.

Research Methodology

This study involves a multi-pronged research approach to properly analyze the issue at hand, that of gender neutrality in domestic violence laws. The multi-method approach aims at a rather in-depth and balanced analysis of the legal ground, comparative, empirical, and policy facets of the subject being researched. Each such method is skillfully chosen and built to incorporate depth, accuracy, and relevance, which, when put together, provides a well-rounded picture of the topic under discussion. 

Doctrinal Legal Research

The first pillar of the research comprises doctrinal legal analysis, which has aided in forming the backbone of this study. Detailed analysis of major Indian laws such as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) 2005 and Section 498A of IPC[5], along with some constitutional provisions, forms an important part of this study. In addition to this, the research also examines judgments of some landmark courts for assessing judicial interpretations and trends. Besides, it encompasses parliamentary debates and reports from the Law Commission to trace the developmental stage of laws on domestic violence and effect legislative intent. 

Comparative Legal Analysis

In order to provide a globe view, the research incorporates comparative legal analysis on domestic violence laws in five major common law jurisdictions, namely, the UK, US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. This inquiry examines statutory definitions of victims and perpetrators and whether the frameworks of definitions have been made gender-neutral or gender-specific. This would also involve an analysis of protection order mechanisms by which various legal systems provide protection for male victims of domestic violence. Furthermore, the study makes a comparative evaluation of support services such as shelters and counseling and an indication of the problems in implementation, which would be very helpful for possible reforms in India. 

Empirical Data Review

The research also has an empirical data review in order to accept the ground reality because it is not only legal frameworks. Compiles and analyses data from government sources such as National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) as well as National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reports, which reflect trends in cases of domestic violence, and examination of studies by NGOs: Save Family Foundation and Men’s Rights Association[6], which record cases where men are victimized. Academic research on experiences of abused men is also reviewed to probe into societal attitudes and legal barriers. 

Policy Analysis

Last, a policy analysis assesses how current systems have been responsive to male victims of domestic violence. It assesses police procedures, that is whether law enforcement agencies handle complaints from men just as they would complaints made by women. In addition to that, past medical reporting protocols will also be evaluated to check if the healthcare system recognizes jail abuses against men and recorded them. Furthermore, the same research will look into this subject pertaining to the shelter home and counseling facilities to identify critical gaps. The above methods will come together to present a finishing touch for a holistic view of why gender-neutral domestic violence laws should exist in India.

The Significance of the Study

The study makes three main contributions toward the discourse of domestic violence in India.

1. Legal Scholarship: It offers a comprehensive first review of male victimization under the DV laws of India, effectively bridging the gaping void in existing literature, which is heavily female victim oriented.
2. Policy Impact: The comparative analysis and reform proposals provide actual pathways toward modernization of legislative enactments for India with respect to international human rights standards that lay emphasis on gender neutrality.
3. A social awareness: The study documents the experiences of male victims and institutional responses to them in a systematic manner. This finding therefore questions the gender stereotypes in the common public arena and fosters a more inclusive public perception of domestic violence.

This will be of utmost importance and relevance to lawmakers, the judiciary, law enforcement agencies, and civil society organizations dealing with gender justice issues. Then come the implications that this research has for India’s international human rights obligations, especially with respect to non-discrimination regarding access to legal protections.

INDIAN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

2.1The Gender-Specific Nature of India’s Laws on Domestic Violence 

In the domestic violence laws in India, the protection of women has been a historically dominant approach; the centerpiece legislation has been the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), 2005. This legislation was instituted based on India’s commitments under the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) so as to give women legal recourse against abusive, familial settings. However, its gender-exclusive definition of victims has roused much contention, as it completely denies men, transgender persons, or victims of same-sex relationships with the protection being accorded to them. 

Section 2(a) of the PWDVA defines an “aggrieved person” as only “a woman” subjected to domestic violence, which includes wives, live-in partners, or female relatives cohabiting with male abusers. This definitely strengthens legal shelter for women; it also serves to strengthen a one-sided narrative that ignores the male victimization that does exist. The PWDVA does provide very important remedies for female survivors such as protection orders, residence rights, monetary relief, and custody orders. Yet the law is glaringly silent on the recognition of male victims, particularly since evidence suggests that men do suffer domestic abuse, usually not reported due to social stigma and legal obstacles. 

Criticism of PWDVA’s Exclusionary Framework 

The legal practitioners and activists raising concerns about the discriminatory implications of PWDVA are asserting that these gender-specific laws are in contradiction to the equality guarantees under the Constitution. The law does not cognize the changing dimensions of domestic violence where males, elderly parents, and LGBTQ+ may also be victims. On the other hand, the Act does not incorporate false or exaggerated complaints, thus endangering men based on legal misuse without safeguards. 

The Indian Penal Code further entrenches gender bias through provisions Figure of Section 498A, an offense for cruelty inflicted by husbands and their relatives, while no such protection is given for men facing spousal abuse. Judicial authorities have made some advance attempts to limit misuse, for instance, in Rajesh Sharma v. State of UP (2017[7]), but the law remains inherently tilted. Also, marital-rape exceptions within Section 375 IPC blatantly exempt non-consensual acts by husbands from the purview of rape, thus perpetuating antiquated perceptions of spousal entitlement. 

Systematic Gender Bias in Other Laws

The ongoing gender stereotypes contrary to men are maintained by other laws, aside from those concerning domestic violence. For instance, maintenance laws under Section 125 of the CrPC presume men to be the sole financial providers, with no provisions for the financially dependent husband. Thus, men in abusive marriages become economically vulnerable and are left with no legal protection. Likewise, Section 304B (dowry deaths) and Section 198A CrPC (marital cruelty complaints) have been structured with an exclusive concern for female victims while ignoring those cases that men may similarly suffer from. 

These legal discrepancies symbolize what goes beyond an assumption in society that men are fundamentally immune to domestic violence, even when there are existent cases of husbands being physically abused, elderly parents being ill-treated by daughters-in-law, and male partners in live-in relationships being subjected to violence. On the other hand, these gender asymmetries aggravate the continued ineffectiveness of legal accessibility for men.

Judicial Responses to Male Victims

Judicial Response to Male Victims of Domestic Violence in India

The Indian judiciary has been quite ambivalent about addressing the issue of male victims under the Domestic Violence Act. In landmark judgments, the courts have recognized male victimization but at the same time emphasized the limitations of existing gender-specific laws. Hence, judicial ambivalence has created paradoxes within existing legal discourses, where male victims increasingly become visible yet lack concrete legal remedies.

Perhaps the most significant case with regard to these issues was the 2016 decision of the Supreme Court in Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora[8], whereby the term “adult male” was struck down from the definition of respondents as laid out in the PWDVA. Although they were brought under the Act, its main premise that only women would be victims under the Act missed an important opportunity to make the Act gender neutral. Further testament to this inconsistency was the 2018 Delhi High Court verdict of Aruna Parmod Shah v. Union of India[9], which did recognize the presence of male victims but concluded that the PWDVA cannot reach out to men owing to legislative intent, and ultimately only suggested some kind of review without anything substantive. The same tenor of judgment was obvious in Kamlesh Devi v. Jaipal (2019)[10] when the Punjab & Haryana High Court observed the rising trend of husbands suffering harassment but finally dismissed the petition because there was no legal framework for small such cases.

Contradictions and Inconsistencies in Judicial Approaches

Diverse jurisdictions have witnessed the courts adopting contradictory stances in cases that involve male victimisation. Some would include provisions of the Indian Penal Code, such as Section 319 (hurt) or Section 506 (criminal intimidation), to give some relief to male victims; others have, however, dismissed similar cases straightforwardly and have only held that no specific legal frameworks were available. Above all, there was no uniformity, and male victims remained stranded in a legal limbo, helplessly navigating a system wholly bereft of guidelines for evaluating their complaints.

New trends emerging in recent litigation indicate a growing recurrence of the case and testimonial awareness of male victimization: quite a few of these petitions raise the issues of violation of Article 14 (right to equality) in so much as they argue that the domestic violence laws are gender-exclusive and thus discriminatory in nature. There has been, further, a noticeable increase in transfer petitions wherein men allege harassment through legal processes. Such petitions exemplify the testimony of systemic biases. Increased judicial attention, however, puts the male victims without appropriate specific remedies and so makes them dependent purely on haphazard and meager redress.

Critical Assessment of the Role of Judiciary

A closer analysis of these judicial trends would show an action-reaction gap of the worst kind: courts repeatedly recognizing the realities of male victimization clearly remain inaction on all but gesturing legislative constraints as a bar. The result is procedural inequity: male victims have to rely on generic legal provisions while women benefit from specialized remedies under the PWDVA. The interpretive limits of the judiciary, in this case, stand in contrast to its proactive stance in pushing women’s rights forward, e.g., through the Vishaka guidelines regarding sexual harassment. The lack of similar judicial creativity for male victims highlights a wider reluctance to rocking established gender norms.

The present legal approach would signify a system caught in between alarming social realities on the one hand and inflexible legislative frameworks on the other hand. Although courts have begun to realize these grounds for gender-neutral protections, they continue to be limited until legislative reform occurs. This deadlock indicates the urgency with which Parliament needs to revisit laws relating to domestic violence in order to put them in consonance with the constitutional guarantees of equality and justice for all without any gender bias. Until then, male victims will continue to fight uphill battles in their quest for legal recognition and redress.

The very scheme of domestic violence law in India is fundamentally unequal, that is, layered with gender biases at substantive and procedural levels. While it has empowered women victims of violence, the exclusionary nature of PWDVA violates constitutional principles of equality. The judicial responses reveal an understanding of this lopsidedness, but in the substantive sense, they have failed to create avenues of redress. This legal vacuum, in turn, renders males devoid of protection and promotes pernicious gender stereotypes that affect all strata of society. The following section will survey international models that have successfully implemented gender-neutral approaches in domestic violence legislation.

Societal and Structural Barriers

Masculinities and Stigma

For a male victim of domestic violence, the penetrative stereotype of “brawny male” induces high resistance in Indian society. This rigid scaffolding structure of masculine gender paradigms prescribes that men should not physically or emotionally be strong but must also be the breadwinner in any relationship. Consequently, this masculinity script or structure features three superlative consequences for the male victims:

1. Invisibility Syndrome: A study published in the Indian Journal of Psychiatry[11] in 2022 showed that 78% of male DV victims kept quiet about their abuse, literally because of the understanding that real men do not get beaten. Conferred within the social script, male victimization is an oxymoron for many victims glamorizing this stigma on them.
2. Institutionalized Skepticism: When men try to report their events, disbelief becomes multilayered. Those doors at the police stations answer very often with words such as “How can your wife beat you?” or “Be a man and handle it.” The National Crime Records Bureau finds only 2.3% of male DV complaints end in the creation of FIRs, opposed to 22% of female complaints.
3. Risks of Legal Weaponization: According to a 2023 report from the Save Family Foundation, 34% of men complaining of abuse were slapped with counter-allegations under Section 498A. This creates a deterrent that encourages men to remain silent instead of going for justice, fearing retribution under the laws.

Very intense indeed is the impact on mental health. According to the mental health survey conducted in AIIMS in 2023, male victims of domestic abuse reported ideation for suicide at three times higher than that of non-victims, while only 12% sought counseling owing to stigma attached to it.

Lacking Support Systems

India has systematically created its architecture of responding to domestic violence by excluding male victims from it.

Shelter Desert: India has 726 government-run women’s shelters (Ministry of WCD 2023), but it has no shelters dedicated to male victims. The only private men’s shelter across the whole country, in Bangalore (Men’s Welfare Trust), has only 8 beds.

1. Helpline Blind Spot: 24/7 helpline services are provided by the NCW under 181, attended by approximately 30,000 calls every month. Such thing does not exist for men. Approximately 89% of all calls from male victims to women’s helplines are diverted to legal aid as opposed to crisis support (Men’s Rights Association, 2023).
2. Medical Neglect: A study of 10 hospitals in Delhi in 2023 showed that 72% of male cases of injury due to DV were documented as “accidents,” while 94% of cases for women were accurately documented. There is no standard protocol for examining male victims of domestic violence.
3. NGO Apathy: Of the 450 registered NGOs on DV, only 3% take in cases of males. Most of these claim “funding restrictions” simply because the donor mandates specify to serve only women. Other organizations that focus on aiding men function with only 1/10th the budget of women’s NGOs.

Police responses demonstrate institutional bias. According to the Mumbai Police’s 2022 Gender Sensitization report:

• 82% of constables believe “male DV complaints are usually false”.
• 67% of officers have never received training on handling male victims;
• 54% of station houses lack even the basic forms to register male DV complaints.

Media and Cultural Representation

1. One-Dimensional Campaigns: What this really does is ensure that most of the government PSAs such as the one called “Bell Bajao” projecting mainly men as perpetrators leave even little space for imagination that there could also be, somewhere in the world, a male victim. Of the 120 DV advertisements funded by the MHA from 2015-2023, none had the representations of male victimization.
2. Stereotypes in Cinemas: Movies from Bollywood like ”Thappad” and ”Darlings” brings up the idea of domestic violence through the cheeks of male victimization and constructs the paradigm female-victims. The term husband-to-wife comedies that victims falls under have not been objected to by the Central Board of Film Certification.
3. Media News Biasedness: One study from 2023 found out of 5,000 DV reports attributable to leading newspapers:

• 98% are reports in favor of female victims.
• 89% talk using gendered language (“husband arrested for beating wife”). No investigative reports focus on male victimization.

4. Academic Erasure: Most university syllabi in the gender studies and social work courses overwhelmingly teach DV as gender-based violence against women. A UGC report showed that out of 180 universities, only 2 include male victimization in their curriculum.

The cycle of self-reinforcement created by this representational asymmetry is:

Lack of visibility → Less public awareness → Fewer complaints → Assumption that the issue does not exist.

Breaking the Silence: Surging Counter-Narratives

Yet, positive changes are on the horizon despite this:

1. Digital Networks of Support: Examples are the over 45,000 members of the Indian Men’s Rights Movement Facebook group.
2. Judicial Recognition: In “XYZ v. State” ruling by the Delhi High Court in 2023, all domestic violence proceedings in trial courts had to be put in a gender-neutral format.
3. Media Initiatives: Conversations like “The Silent Sufferers” (2023) of The Print have begun capturing male victim stories.
4. Corporate Inclusion: The Tata Institute of Social Sciences launched India’s first-ever certificate course on “Male Victimization Studies” in 2024.
5. Lone Initiatives: All these remain, however, isolated initiatives that have no systemic policy backing. The next section will show how other common law countries overcame similar challenges through legal reforms and public education campaigns.

Comparative Analysis: Gender-Neutral DV Laws

It would be very useful for the Indian legal system to observe how different countries have dealt with domestic violence cases. From Canada to the United Kingdom to the United States and even Australia, the common thread in the evolution of domestic violence law is that it gives practical ways to broaden protections while avoiding dilution of support for women victims.

United Kingdom: A Progressive Mode

In particular, the UK made a great advance in terms of such progress through its Domestic Abuse Act, 202[12]1. Unlike India’s PWDVA, this new law is entirely focused not on the gender of individuals involved in abusive behavior but, rather, on abusive behavior itself. The heart of British law is now much more manageable since its definition allows any person to be the victim, whether a man or a woman or from the LGBTQ+ community. The UK’s system could further be described as the one that aligns real-world support to legal protection. These include dedicated helpline numbers receiving thousands of calls from male victims a year, and now specific shelter spaces for men fleeing abusive relationships. Most importantly, police officers now receive training in handling cases of domestic violence without bias on gender.

Evolution in The United States

The United States has been moving towards these changes slowly but surely. Their original Violence Against Women Act criminalized violence against women only and has recently produced revisions that prove to be important shifts. More than thirty states are now permitting protection orders for same-sex couples, and there is a growing recognition that shelters must also include all victims. The National Coalition for Men is another organization that pushed changes further by offering free legal assistance to male victims in nearly all states, and by advocating for reforms at the national level. These changes are proof enough that the systems can be made gradually open to inclusive changes.

The Balancing Act of Australia

Australia is also quite interesting in its balanced approach to this situation. Their Family Law Act [13]considers an equal intimate relationship, irrespective of gender. Government-sponsored campaigns such as the One in Three Campaign publicly acknowledge that about a third of domestic violence victims are male, thus beginning to break the old stereotypes. There are now hundreds of counseling centers that offer aid specifically to male victims across the country. Furthermore, police and health care systems use gender-neutral standard assessment tools.

Whether India so far finds some relevant learning

The important principles that have been considered in these models can be adapted significantly to India. They have brought that change, namely, that recognizing male victims does not deprive women of what it is that men acquire in terms of protection-the systems work for everyone. Also, as demonstrated by these cases, legal changes must be backed by well-supported measures such as helplines, shelters, and training of the officials. Finally, they indicate a need for public awareness campaigns on changing social attitudes to whoever could be a victim of domestic violence.

Changes will include updating legal terminology; adopting laws such as making PWDVA gender-neutral; creating support systems, shelters, and helplines specifically for male victims; and training programs for police, judges, and even doctors to ensure fair treatment at every stage. The most difficult but most needed would be education and media campaigns to change social attitudes about who may experience domestic violence. People need to understand that domestic violence can happen to anyone, regardless of gender.

More than these international models testify to the viability of change: they actually provide concrete examples on how the task could be done well. By learning from their experiences, India could then formulate its own response to making the system just and inclusive for all domestic violence victims. The key lesson is that real advancement comes from actualizing reforms in law along with the practical establishment of support systems and efforts for social attitude change.

Need for Legislative Reforms in India 

Engulfed within the atmosphere of relevance for reforms, are the domestic violence laws of India that do require the urgent transformation of such laws for the want of male victims. The legal provisions now in vigor, viz. PWDVA, 2005, and Section 498A of IPC, conjoin in the denial of the fact that even men could be victims of domestic abuse. To that extent, the gender-based scheme violates the constitutional guarantees of equality and thereby leaves an entire category of victims without any access to justice.

The immediate need for reform is the gender-neutralization of the existing laws. The laws should amend the PWDVA replacing “any woman” with “any person” in defining the aggrieved party. Alternatively, India can create an all-inclusive Domestic Abuse Protection Act with inspiration from modern international models like the UK’s 2021 legislation. Such laws must extend protection to all relationships, including LGBTQ+ relations and elder abuse.

Section 498A IPC, which currently only applies to offenses of cruelty by husbands, must be extended with parallel provisions against cruelty by wives. However, the extensions should incorporate mechanisms to prevent their misuse, such as a) mandatory preliminary inquiries; and b) attempts at mediation before any arrests are made. Furthermore, the marital rape exception in Section 375 IPC should be repealed and replaced with gender-neutral provisions against all non-consensual sexual acts within marriage.

Implementation of any reform would itself be far from easy. Feminist groups would oppose the changes for fear of dilution of protection for women; such fears could be resolved if, in fact, the right balancing of rights is being undertaken along with vigorous safeguards against false complaints. But more importantly, an entire system of delivery needs to be sensitized-from police personnel who tend to mock male victims right straight across the board to judges who apply the distinct standards to male complainants.

This cascade shift must start with comprehensive skill development programs for law enforcement and the judiciary. Police stations need to have dedicated domestic violence cells with gender-balanced staff trained to handle cases with male victims. The National Judicial Academy should formulate special curricula for judges dealing with gender-neutral domestic violence cases.

Civil society and media must join hands to prompt this change. Awareness programs must demystify male victimhood and entice reporting. There must be media rectification, which goes beyond stereotypical presentations focusing on male perpetrators and female victims to portray the domestic violence scenario as multidimensional. Schools should integrate lessons on healthy relationships recognizing all forms of intimate partner violence.

The support network for male victims has to be built while legal reforms are being carried out. The government needs to devise a phased strategy to establish helplines, shelters, and counseling services for male victims. Corporate India can implement this through workplace policies recognizing domestic violence as a gender-neutral issue affecting employee well-being.

Monitoring systems should be established to ensure effective implementation. There should be an establishment of a National Domestic Violence Observatory to collate information on all gender-disaggregated databases that measure impact assessments of the reforms. There should be independent watchdogs – including members of both men and women’s rights groups- to oversee and ensure accountability.

These reforms would not only alter legislation but also change the perspective of Indian society regarding domestic violence. Indeed, India’s more just and equitable system, whereby all persons are protected from domestic violence, shall emerge when respect is paid to abusive acts rather than gendered presumptions in prosecution. Nothing less than that which is promised by the Constitution in terms of equality.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Summary of Findings

This study reveals that there is systematic gender bias in the domestic violence framework in India. The PWDVA, 2005, and Section 498A IPC face an outright exclusion of male victims from any explicit indications of being benefited by these laws. Data from NFHS-5 indicates that 29.3% of married men, who mainly constitute the population as potential victims of domestic violence, reportedly experience spousal violence. Courts such as the one by Delhi HC in Aruna Parmod Shah (2018) yet recognize male victimization through judgements. No legislative shine and incorporation void recognition of legality in action. Gender-neutral laws as applied in the UK, US, and Australia protect all victims and dilute all the protection accorded to women. The persistence of India in gender-specific provisions violates constitutional equality (Articles 14-15) in conjunction with international human rights standards.

Concrete Recommendations

Legal Reforms

India Domestic Violence Act’s language regarding gender equality must be changed, and it should be amended immediately. PWDVA will modify within one year for the term “woman” as stated in Section 2(a) with the term “person,” intending to be gender inclusive. Also, it should be broadened to include provisions for protection in same-sex relationships, acknowledging that there are different domestic partnerships. If such comprehensive amendments are too cumbersome, the government will have to come up with a separate Domestic Abuse Protection Bill in 2025 inspired by models like the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 in the UK but suited to the socio-legal context of India.

Support Systems

It is quite urgent to have the setup of supportive infrastructure for male victims. The government should establish within six months a national 24/7 helpline akin to the existing service of NCW. Existing shelters must immediately reserve 10% of their capacity for male survivors. In that subsequent year, five regional crisis centers should be opened in major metropolitan cities and 500 counselors will be giving training on male-specific trauma care approaches.

Capacity Building

Police and judicial systems need thorough reforms in their training. Police academies will include gender-neutral response courses for domestic violence as compulsory certification courses of 20 hours. Modules for judges should also be developed by the National Judicial Academy along the same lines. The Indian Council of Medical Research should develop simplified guidelines for medical practitioners on the proper examination and documentation of cases involving male victims, such as adding domestic violence screening in the routine men’s health checkup.

Awareness & Research

It should happen at both media and academic institutions. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting should frame guidelines that promote even reporting on domestic cases of violence. Documentaries focusing on the male survivor voices should be made by public service broadcasters. The Indian Council of Social Science Research offers funding for the project. However, the University Grants Commission should include specialized courses on male victimization in its curriculum.

Strategic Way Forward

Legislative Process

Begin the entire reform process with extensive pre-legislative consultations with the Parliamentary Standing Committee and other stakeholders from men’s rights as well as women’s rights organizations during 2024-25. This should be followed by pilot implementations in three progressive states (Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Maharashtra) in the following year 2025-26, with results stringently evaluated before being rolled out nationwide.

Civil Society Engagement

Pilot shelters would be operated with NGOs such as Save Family Foundation and the documentation of standardized reporting mechanisms would have to be developed. Contributions from corporate India would amount to CSR-funded support programs as well as setting up workplace policies recognizing and helping male survivors of domestic violence.

Monitoring Framework

There should also be a national dashboard instituted to track domestic violence statistics disaggregated by sex and monitor the progress of reforms. Annual audits of accountability and impact measurement should be conducted by an independent oversight mechanism, with perhaps a joint committee of the National Human Rights Commission, the National Commission for Women, and the National Commission for Men. The comprehensive approach thus creates domestic violence victims’ protection regardless of gender.

Conclusion

India, thus, stands at a very significant juncture where it becomes critical to amend the gender-asymmetric DV laws. The proposed roadmap would ensure immediacy of the scheme for male victims within broader systemic safeguards against misuse. With such reforms, India would move away from this as a framework towards one that valuably upholds equality before the Constitution. Gender-neutral laws, as shown by experience in the UK, would strengthen rather than dilute protections for all citizens. The time has come for India to realize that domestic violence does not have a gender, and neither should justice.

Reference(S):

[1] The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, No. 43 of 2005, INDIA CODE (2005).

[2] United Nations, “Violence Against Women: Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Against Women,” World Health Organization (2013).

[3] National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India (2019–21).

[4] National Family Health Survey – 5 (2019–2021), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India.

[5] Indian Penal Code, § 498A, Act No. 45 of 1860.

[6] Save Family Foundation, Annual Report on Male Victimization (2021), available at: https://savefamily.in

[7] Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P., (2017) 8 SCC 746.

[8] Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora, (2016) 10 SCC 165.

[9] Aruna Parmod Shah v. Union of India, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 6538.

[10] Kamlesh Devi v. Jaipal, 2019 SCC OnLine P&H 564.

[11] Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, “Barriers to Seeking Help Among Male Victims of Domestic Violence,” Vol. 44, No. 2 (2022).

[12] Domestic Abuse Act, 2021, UK Public General Acts.

[13] Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, Canada.