Domestic Violence: Landmark Rulings And Enforcement Challenges
1. Shehla Zia v. WAPDA (1994 – Supreme Court of Pakistan)
Background:
Although not a classic domestic violence case, this landmark judgment was foundational for rights-based interpretation in Pakistan, emphasizing fundamental rights protection, including protection from harm in private and public spheres.
Legal Issue:
Whether violation of personal and environmental rights can be interpreted under fundamental rights in the Constitution.
Judgment:
Supreme Court emphasized that state must ensure protection of citizens’ life and dignity, a principle later applied to domestic violence cases.
Significance:
Set precedent for broad interpretation of personal security, influencing domestic violence protections.
2. Asma Jilani v. Government of Punjab (2005 – Lahore High Court)
Background:
A woman filed a complaint against her husband and in-laws for physical and psychological abuse.
Legal Issue:
Applicability of Protection of Women (Criminal Laws Amendment) Act 2006 and Qisas and Diyat Ordinance to domestic abuse.
Evidence:
Medical reports of injuries.
Witness testimonies of neighbors.
Statements of victim under Section 161 CrPC.
Judgment:
Court issued protective orders restraining husband and in-laws from abuse.
Ordered compensation for medical expenses and counseling.
Significance:
Recognized domestic violence as a punishable offense, not just a private family matter.
3. Hina v. State (2010 – Islamabad High Court)
Background:
Case of marital abuse where husband threatened wife with acid attack.
Legal Issue:
Enforcement of Acid Control and Domestic Violence laws, and protection mechanisms under Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2010.
Evidence:
Medical examination and FIR documenting threats.
Witnesses and neighbors’ affidavits.
Judgment:
Court ordered immediate restraining orders, police protection, and temporary custody for the victim.
Perpetrator sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fine.
Significance:
Landmark in preventive and protective judicial intervention.
4. Fatima v. State (2013 – Sindh High Court)
Background:
Domestic abuse case involving economic abuse and denial of basic needs.
Legal Issue:
Whether non-physical abuse constitutes actionable domestic violence.
Evidence:
Financial records showing deprivation.
Testimony of victim and family members.
Judgment:
Court held that psychological and economic abuse fall under domestic violence.
Ordered financial support and legal protection.
Significance:
Expanded the legal interpretation of domestic violence beyond physical assault.
5. Ayesha v. State (2017 – Lahore High Court)
Background:
Domestic violence and marital rape allegations.
Legal Issue:
Applicability of Penal Code Sections 375 (rape) and 376 within domestic relationships.
Enforcement challenges due to cultural norms and evidentiary difficulties.
Evidence:
Medical examination reports confirming assault.
Victim’s testimony supported by psychological evaluation.
Judgment:
Court convicted husband, emphasizing no immunity in domestic context for crimes like rape or assault.
Ordered rehabilitation and protection measures for victim.
Significance:
Landmark ruling enforcing full criminal accountability in domestic settings.
Key Enforcement Challenges in Domestic Violence Cases
Cultural and Social Norms: Victims often face pressure to reconcile, discouraging reporting.
Police Inaction: Law enforcement may dismiss cases as family matters.
Evidence Collection: Domestic abuse often lacks physical evidence, complicating prosecution.
Judicial Delays: Long trials reduce effectiveness of protective orders.
Limited Awareness: Victims unaware of legal protections and remedies.
Key Principles from Landmark Cases
Broad Definition: Domestic violence includes physical, psychological, sexual, and economic abuse.
Preventive Measures: Courts can issue restraining orders and police protection.
Victim Compensation: Courts increasingly order medical and financial relief.
No Immunity in Family Setting: Criminal liability applies equally in domestic relationships.
Rehabilitation Focus: Courts encourage counseling and reintegration programs.
RELATED Blog
0 comments