PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 — Ss. 12, 18–23, 28, 29, 31, 33 — CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 — Ss. 190, 200–204, 204, 254, 482 — CONSTITUTION OF INDIA — Art. 227 — PROCEEDINGS — NATURE — CIVIL OR CRIMINAL — QUASHMENT Domestic Violence proceedings — Nature of proceedings under Chapter IV — Reliefs under Ss.12, 18–23 are civil in nature — Respondent is not an “accused” — Magistrate does not exercise criminal jurisdiction while granting such reliefs. (Paras 9, 13–15, 25–32) Procedure — Application under S.12 is not a “complaint” under S.2(d) CrPC — Cognizance under S.190 CrPC and procedure under Ss.200–204 CrPC inapplicable — Issuance of summons under S.61 CrPC deprecated — Only notice under S.13 DV Act read with Rules permissible. (Paras 19–22, 51–52) Section 28 DV Act — CrPC applicability is residuary — S.28(2) enables Magistrate to devise own procedure — Departure from strict CrPC procedure permissible to advance object of Act. (Paras 18, 23–24) Quashment — Petition under S.482 CrPC — Maintainability — Proceedings under S.12 are civil — Magistrate not acting as criminal court — Petition under S.482 CrPC not maintainable to quash S.12 application. (Paras 40–41, 44–45, 50) Supervisory jurisdiction — Remedy against abuse in DV proceedings — Petition under Art.227 Constitution maintainable — High Court can exercise superintendence over Magistrate. (Paras 42–45) Guidelines — Issued to Magistrates — To prevent misuse and delay — Mechanical issuance of summons deprecated — Personal appearance ordinarily not required — Preliminary issues maintainable — Evidence by affidavit permissible — CPC principles can be applied where appropriate. (Paras 51–52)

advocatemmmohan

PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 — Ss. 12, 18–23, 28, 29, 31, 33 —
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 — Ss. 190, 200–204, 204, 254, 482 —
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA — Art. 227 —
PROCEEDINGS — NATURE — CIVIL OR CRIMINAL — QUASHMENT

Domestic Violence proceedings — Nature of proceedings under Chapter IV — Reliefs under Ss.12, 18–23 are civil in nature — Respondent is not an “accused” — Magistrate does not exercise criminal jurisdiction while granting such reliefs.
(Paras 9, 13–15, 25–32)

Procedure — Application under S.12 is not a “complaint” under S.2(d) CrPC — Cognizance under S.190 CrPC and procedure under Ss.200–204 CrPC inapplicable — Issuance of summons under S.61 CrPC deprecated — Only notice under S.13 DV Act read with Rules permissible.
(Paras 19–22, 51–52)

Section 28 DV Act — CrPC applicability is residuary — S.28(2) enables Magistrate to devise own procedure — Departure from strict CrPC procedure permissible to advance object of Act.
(Paras 18, 23–24)

Quashment — Petition under S.482 CrPC — Maintainability — Proceedings under S.12 are civil — Magistrate not acting as criminal court — Petition under S.482 CrPC not maintainable to quash S.12 application.
(Paras 40–41, 44–45, 50)

Supervisory jurisdiction — Remedy against abuse in DV proceedings — Petition under Art.227 Constitution maintainable — High Court can exercise superintendence over Magistrate.
(Paras 42–45)

Guidelines — Issued to Magistrates — To prevent misuse and delay — Mechanical issuance of summons deprecated — Personal appearance ordinarily not required — Preliminary issues maintainable — Evidence by affidavit permissible — CPC principles can be applied where appropriate.
(Paras 51–52)

---

ANALYSIS OF FACTS

1. A large number of petitions were filed before the High Court seeking quashing of applications under Section 12 of the DV Act by invoking Section 482 CrPC. (Paras 1–2)

2. The Court noted serious delay in disposal of DV proceedings, with many matters pending for years due to interim stays obtained in quash petitions. (Para 2)

3. The principal issue framed was whether the High Court has jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash a complaint/application under Section 12 of the DV Act. (Para 1)

4. The Court undertook an extensive examination of:

   • The scheme, object, and legislative history of the DV Act;

   • The nature of rights and reliefs under Chapter IV;

   • The procedural framework under the DV Act and Rules. (Paras 6–24)

---

ANALYSIS OF LAW

1. Nature of DV Proceedings

   • Reliefs under Chapter IV (Ss.12, 18–23) are purely civil in nature, though adjudicated by a Magistrate.

   • Criminality arises only on breach of protection/interim orders under Section 31 or failure of Protection Officer under Section 33. (Paras 13–15)

2. Test for Civil vs Criminal Proceedings

   • Applying settled constitutional jurisprudence, the Court held that the nature of the right violated and relief sought, not the forum or procedure, determines the character of proceedings. (Paras 25–29, 32)

3. Application under Section 12

   • An application under Section 12 is not a complaint under CrPC.

   • Consequently, Sections 190, 200–204 CrPC (cognizance, process, summons) have no application. (Paras 19–21)

4. Section 28 DV Act

   • CrPC applies only residually.

   • Section 28(2) empowers the Magistrate to devise procedure, including permitting chief-examination by affidavit. (Paras 18, 23)

5. Section 482 CrPC

   • Inherent powers under Section 482 can be exercised only in relation to proceedings before criminal courts.

   • Since a Magistrate deciding Section 12 applications exercises civil jurisdiction, Section 482 CrPC is not available to quash such proceedings. (Paras 40–41, 44–45)

6. Alternative Remedy

   • The Magistrate is a subordinate court for purposes of Article 227, and supervisory jurisdiction can be invoked in appropriate cases. (Paras 42–45)

7. Guidelines Issued

   • The Court laid down detailed procedural guidelines to Magistrates to curb misuse, prevent delay, avoid harassment of relatives, and ensure expeditious disposal. (Paras 51–52)

---

RATIO DECIDENDI

Proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 for reliefs under Chapter IV are civil in nature; while adjudicating such applications the Magistrate does not exercise criminal jurisdiction, and therefore a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not maintainable to quash such proceedings; the appropriate remedy, in an appropriate case, lies under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.