[T]he Court is convinced that the impugned proceedings have been initiated in abuse of process of the Court and process of the law. A personal grudge against marriage of choice of the daughter is being settled by virtue of initiating impugned criminal proceedings, which would not be permissible in law. Such prosecution would abrogate constitutional right vested in the petitioners to get married as per their discretion.

An orderly transformation of the society could come only through the instrument of law, for the law is a potent tool of social engineering and fashions and shapes public opinions. If severe punishment to honour killings has not stopped them, if judicial approaches have not reduced their incidence and police would only stand as mute spectators, if not active collaborators, we will come to a situation of accepting these honour killings as unstoppable, that are at once, shameful and abhorrent. The society ought to understand that all the economic progress and developmental goals of what our policy makers endeavour to secure will be trashed, if we cannot respect an adult’s autonomy to choose his or her partner to be together, with or without marriage.

[We] are inclined to hold that … the provisions of “respondent” in section 2(q) of the DV Act is not to be read in isolation but has to be read as a part of the scheme of the DV Act. … If so read, the complaint alleging acts of domestic violence is maintainable not only against an adult male person who is son or brother, who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved complainant – mother or sister – but the complaint can also be filed against a relative of the son or brother including wife of the son/wife or the brothers and sisters of the male respondent.

A girl who has attained the age of discretion and was on the verge of attaining majority and is capable of knowing what was good and what was bad for her, cannot be said to be a victim of inducement. … In such circumstances, desire of the girl/victim is required to be seen.

Testimonial content here.

[W]e are perturbed and anguished to notice that…we do not yet have a fast track procedure for dealing with cases of rape and gang rape lodged under Section 376 IPC. … [T]he recording of evidence of the victim and other witnesses multiple times ought to be put to an end which is the primary reason for delay of the trial. … [This amendment] can surely…reduce the duration of trial and thus offer a speedy remedy.

An act of domestic violence once committed, subsequent decree of divorce will not absolve the liability of the Respondent from the offence committed or to deny the benefit to which the aggrieved person is entitled under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 including monetary relief Under Section 20, Child Custody Under Section 21, Compensation Under Section 22 and interim or ex parte order Under Section 23 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.