Important Judgments on

Domestic Violence Act, 2005

February 11, 2019
0
6324

Advertisement

February 11, 2019

Domestic Violence has been an age-old societal concern and women at

home have been tormented and tortured by her own family members
since time immemorial. However, a special legislation addressing the
issue was formulated by the Parliament only in the year 2005.

The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter

referred to as the Domestic Violence Act) drafted for women
empowerment and for protection of women against acts of violence in
India came into force in the year 2005. The scope of this piece of
legislation has been expounded in plethora of judgments by the High
Courts and the Supreme Court in India.

What is a Shared Household?

Case name: S.R. Batra vs. Smt. Taruna Batra

In this case, the Supreme Court with reference to definition of shared

household under Section 2(s) of the Domestic Violence Act stated that the
definition of ‘shared household’ in Section 2(s) of the Act is not very
happily worded, and appears to be the result of clumsy drafting requires
to be interpreted in a sensible manner.

The Court held that under Section 17(1) of the Act wife is only entitled to
claim a right to residence in a shared household, and a ‘shared
household’ would only mean the house belonging to or taken on
rent by the husband, or the house which belongs to the joint
family of which the husband is a member. In the case, the property
in question neither belonged to the husband nor was it taken on rent by
him nor was it a joint family property of which the husband was a
member. It was the exclusive property of mother of husband and not a
shared household.

Women in Live-in Relationships Protected

under the Domestic Violence Act
Case name: D. Veluswamy v. D. Patchaiammal

In this Supreme Court verdict, a wider meaning to an “aggrieved person”

under Section 2(a) of the Domestic Violence Act was conferred by the
Supreme Court, wherein the Court enumerated five ingredients of a live in
relationship as follows:

1. Both the parties must behave as husband and wife and are recognized as husband
and wife in front of society
2. They must be of a valid legal age of marriage
3. They should qualify to enter into marriage eg. None of the partner should have a
souse living at the time of entering into relationship.
4. They must have voluntarily cohabited for a significant period of time
5. They must have lived together in a shared household

The Supreme Court also observed that not all live-in-relationships

will amount to a relationship in the nature of marriage to get
the benefit of Domestic Violence Act. To get such benefit the
conditions mentioned above shall be fulfilled and this has to be proved by
evidence.

Status of a Keep- The Court in the case further stated that if

a man has a ‘keep’ whom he maintains financially and uses mainly for
sexual purpose and/or a servant it would not be a relationship in the
nature of marriage.

In this case, the Court also referred to the term “palimony” which means
grant of maintenance to a woman who has lived for a substantial period
of time with a man without marrying and is then deserted by him.

Estranged Wife or Live-in-Partner can Claim

Maintenance u/Domestic Violence Act-
Supreme Court
Case name: Lalita Toppo v. State of Jharkhand & anr.
In this recent case, the Supreme Court has categorically held
that maintenance can be claimed under the provisions of the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Domestic
Violence Act) even if the claimant is not a legally wedded wife and
therefore not entitled to claim of maintenance under Section 125
of Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Bench explained that the provisions contained in Section 3(a) of the
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which defines the term “domestic violence”
also constitutes “economic abuse” as domestic violence. The Court further
opined that under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, the
victim i.e. estranged wife or live-in-partner would be entitled to
more relief than what is contemplated under Section 125 of the
CrPC i.e. to a shared household also.

Not all Live-in-Relationships are Covered under

the Domestic Violence Act- Bombay HC
Case name: Reshma Begum v. State of Maharashtra & anr.

In the case, the issue that fell for consideration before the High Court of
Bombay was the interpretation of provision of Section 2(f) of the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Domestic
Violence Act).

With reference to the interpretation of the term “relationship” under

Section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act, the Court noted that
the interpretation put on the definition and particularly the
words ‘relationship in the nature of marriage’ by the Supreme Court
in Veluswamy’s case means:

 The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses.
  They must be of legal age of marry.
 They must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage;
 They must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as
being akin to spouses for a significant period of time

In view of the aforesaid, the High Court opined that it was

abundantly clear that not all the live in relationships are covered
under the provision of Section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act.
It is only those which qualify to be the relationship in the nature
of marriage are governed by that provision.

In order to constitute such relationship, a legal marriage between

the two must be possible.

The entire case can be accessed here.

Against whom can the Complaint be Filed

under the Domestic Violence Act?
Case name: Sandhya Wankhede vs. Manoj Bhimrao Wankhede

This issue has often remained a controversial one as Section 2(q) of the
Domestic Violence Act defines “respondent” as any adult male person
who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person
and against whom the aggrieved person has sought any relief under this
Act:

Provided that an aggrieved wife or female living in a relationship in the

nature of a marriage may also file a complaint against a relative of the
husband or the male partner.
In view of the definition of the term respondent covering adult male
person, the judiciary has time and again been confronted with the
argument that an aggrieved person can file complain under the Domestic
Violence Act against an adult male person only and not against the
female relatives of the husband i.e. mother-in-law, sister-in-law.

However, the Supreme Court in the aforementioned case put to rest the
issue by holding that the proviso to Section 2(q) does not exclude
female relatives of the husband or male partner from the ambit of
a complaint that can be made under the provisions of
the Domestic Violence Act. Therefore, complaints are not just
maintainable against the adult male person but also the female relative of
such adult male.

Wife cannot implicate one and all in the Family

Case name: Ashish Dixit vs. State of UP & Anr.

In this case, the Supreme Court has held that a wife cannot implicate one
and all in a Domestic violence case. In this case, the complainant apart
from arraying the husband and in-laws in the complaint, had also included
all and sundry as parties to the case, of which the complainant didn’t
even know names.

Supreme Court on Duty of Courts while

deciding Cases under Domestic Violence
Act
Case name: Krishna Bhatacharjee v. Sarathi Choudhury and
Another
The Apex Court while elucidating on the duty of courts while deciding
complaints under the Domestic Violence Act stated that:

 It is the duty of the Court to scrutinise the facts from all angles whether a plea
advanced by the respondent to nullify the grievance of the aggrieved person is
really legally sound and correct.
 The principle “justice to the cause is equivalent to the salt of ocean” should be
kept in mind. The Court of Law is bound to uphold the truth which sparkles when
justice is done.
 Before throwing a petition at the threshold, it is obligatory to see that the person
aggrieved under such a legislation is not faced with a situation of non-
adjudication, for the 2005 Act as we have stated is a beneficial as well as
assertively affirmative enactment for the realisation of the constitutional rights of
women and to ensure that they do not become victims of any kind of domestic
violence.

Husband’s Obligation to Maintain Wife

under Domestic Violence Act
Case name: Vimlaben Ajitbhai Patel v. Vatslaben Ashokbhai Patel
and ors.

It was held in this case, that when it comes to maintenance of wife under
the Domestic Violence Act read with the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance
Act, 1956 it is the personal obligation of the husband to maintain his wife.
Property of mother-in-law can neither be subject matter of attachment
nor during the life time of husband can his personal liability to maintain
his wife be directed to be enforced against such property.

Maintenance of Mother under the Domestic

Violence Act
Case name: Ganesh S/o. Rajendra Kapratwar, Abhijeet
Vs. The State of Maharashtra

The Bombay High Court in an application

preferred by the mother for maintenance and medical expenses under the
and medical expenses under the Domestic Violence
Actand the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance
Act, 1956 against her son and grandsons has held that:

“Grandsons would have been liable to pay maintenance to

grandmother
under Sections 22(1) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956,
provided their father had not been alive and not capable of
paying maintenance.”

Retrospective application of the Domestic

Violence Act
Case name: V.D. Bhanot Vs. Savita Bhanot

In the case, the Apex Court upheld the Delhi High Court’s view that -
“even a wife who had shared a household before the Domestic
Violence Act came into force would be entitled to the protection of
the Domestic Violence Act”.

Hence, the Domestic Violence Act entitles the aggrieved person to file
an Application under the Act even for the acts which have been
committed prior to the commencement of the Domestic Violence Act.

Also read Filing domestic violence case is not an act of cruelty

Also read Who can claim relief under the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act 2005

Right of Women to Reside in her Matrimonial

Home
Case name: Roma Rajesh Tiwari vs Rajesh Dinanath Tiwari

The Bombay High Court elaborated on the right of women to reside in her
matrimonial home or shared household. The Court observed that the
‘Statement of Objects and Reasons’ of the Act makes it clear that,
this Domestic Violence Act is enacted to secure the right of a woman to
reside in her matrimonial home or shared household, irrespective of the
question ‘whether she has any right, title or interest in the said household
or not’.

It is also irrelevant whether the Respondent has a legal or

equitable interest in the shared household. The moment it is
proved that it was a shared household, as both of them had, in
their matrimonial relationship, i.e. domestic relationship, resided
together there and in this case, upto the disputes arose, it follows
that the Petitioner-wife gets right to reside therein and,
therefore, to get the order of interim injunction, restraining
Respondent-husband from dispossessing her, or, in any other
manner, disturbing her possession from the said flat.

Can order be passed directing respondent to

remove himself from the Shared
household?
Case name: Sabita Mark Burges vs Mark Lionel Burges
Yes, under Section 19(1) (b) of Domestic Violence Act order can be
passed directing the Respondent to remove himself from the shared
household. Thus, the Magistrate is empowered to pass an order directing
the respondent to remove himself from the shared household.

In this case, the Bombay High Court held that no matter that a man
may alone own a particular house, he has no right to be violent
against his wife or the woman he lives with and if the Court sees
any violence he must be restrained from entering upon the
residence essentially to secure the wife and children against
further violence and similar disputes.

Object behind enactment of Section 19 of Domestic Violence

Act – In Sabita Mark Burges case, the Bombay High Court very
succinctly explained the object behind residence order as-

It is common observance that the applications for grant of injunction in

respect of the residence and possession of the respondent is essentially
seen by Courts upon the proprietary rights of the parties. Since in most
cases wives do not own matrimonial homes, they are statutorily given
rights therein which were not given to them by Courts under the
principles of common law so that they have a right to peaceful enjoyment
of their matrimonial home. Section 19 of Domestic Violence Act came
to be enacted in the first place granting essentially the
wives/women peace against domestic violence in their residence,
their title notwithstanding. This statutory grant is upon the sublime
principle of human rights prevailing over proprietory rights. It may bear
repetition to state that both are equally entitled to the said flat unless one
of them is violent.
Order directing husband to remove himself
from shared household to be exercised
sparingly
Case name: Manju Sharma vs. Ramesh Sharma

The District Court of Delhi while substantiating on Section 19(1)(b) of

Domestic Violence Act opined that the law empowers the court to direct
the removal of respondent from the shared household, however, such
power is to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional circumstances.

In this aforementioned case, the wife was awarded interim protection and
respondent was restrained from perpetrating any kind of domestic
violence on the aggrieved person during the proceedings. However, the
respondent breached the said order on two occasions. He continued
perpetrating domestic violence on the aggrieved person despite the
protection order granted in favour of the aggrieved person. Hence,
considering the facts of the case, the Court passed directed the
respondent husband to remove himself from the shared household
under Section 19(1)(b) of Domestic Violence Act.

Whether women members of the Family can be

removed from shared household u/Section
19(1)(b) of DV Act?
Case name: Meenavathi vs Senthamarai Selvi

No, the Proviso to Section 19 clearly states that no order under Section
19(1)(b) of Domestic Violence Act can be passed against any person who
is a woman.
In this case it was held that in the guise of passing an order
under Section 19(1)(b) of Domestic Violence Act, such women members
of the family cannot be directed to be removed from the shared
household.

A similar observation was made by the High Court of Madras in the case
of Uma Narayanan vs Mrs. Priya Krishna Prasad, wherein the Court
observed that under Section 19(1)(b) of Domestic Violence Act, the
Magistrate is empowered to pass an order directing the respondent to
remove himself from the shared household. While enumerating the
directions that could be passed under Section 19(1)(b) of Domestic
Violence Act and with particular reference to the direction that could be
issued under Section 19(1)(b) of Domestic Violence Act the said proviso
has been incorporated just to protect the interest of a woman member of
the family who is living in such a shared household. Such a provision in
the proviso has been incorporated only for the aforesaid limited purpose.
In a shared household which may belong to a joint family women
members may also be living and in the guise of passing an order
under Section 19(1) (b) of the Act, such women members of the
family cannot be directed to be removed from the shared
household but such a direction can be issued only against male
members.

Provision of Alternate Accommodation u/

Section 19 of Domestic Violence Act
Case name: Ajay Kumar Jain v. Baljit Kaur Jain

Section 19(1)(f) of Domestic Violence Act states that the respondent can
be directed to secure same level of alternate accommodation for the
aggrieved person as enjoyed by her in the shared household.
In the aforesaid case, the Court observed that a wife cannot have right to
live in a particular property and the same cannot become a clog on the
property denying the right of the husband to deal with the property when
he is willing to provide an alternative matrimonial home to her. It was
also held that she cannot insist on residing in the suit property alone
when the husband had offered a suitable alternative arrangement for her.

Residence Order u/Domestic Violence Act- If

Property is Sold, Daughter-in-law is Entitled
to Alternate Residence and Compensation
Case name: Shachi Mahajan vs Santosh Mahajan

In this very recent case of 2019, the Daughter-in-law had secured

protection order of residence under Section 19 of Protection of Women
against Domestic Violence Act, 2005 of property in her Mother-in-
law’s name (hereinafter referred to as the subject property). However, in
a subsequent development, the subject property was sold by the Mother-
in-law to a third party by a registered sale deed. In view of the same, the
Mother-in-Law contended that as the subject property was sold, the
daughter-in-law could not enforce her rights of residence in the shared
household.

However, the High Court of Delhi directed the Mother-in-law to provide an

alternate residence to the Daughter-in-law and also pay compensation.

The Court noted that action of the Mother-in-Law in selling the subject
property, though not strictly illegal, had caused loss to the Daughter- in-
Law. Accordingly, one would also have balance the corresponding rights
of the parties. In this context, the Court made reference to Section 19(1)
(f) of the Domestic Violence Act which stipulates that the Magistrate
shall secure same level of alternative accommodation for the
aggrieved person as enjoyed by her in the shared household or
direct payment of rent for the same, if the circumstances so
require.

Can Husband Initiate Proceedings against Wife

u/Domestic Violence Act?
Case name: Mohd. Zakir v. Shabana & Ors.

In this very interesting case of 2018, High Court of Karnataka held that a
petition under the Domestic Violence Act by the husband or an adult male
can be entertained. To arrive at its decision, the High Court placed
reliance on Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of Hiral P. Harsora v.
Kusum Narottamdas Harsora, wherein the Supreme Court while
striking down a portion of Section 2(a) of the Act (defining “aggrieved
person”) on the ground that it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution
of India and the phrase “adult male” as appearing in Section 2(q) of the
Act stood deleted.

In view of the aforesaid ruling of Apex Court, the High Court opined that
If the said sub-section is read after deleting the expression ‘adult male’, it
would appear that any person, whether male or female, aggrieved
and alleging violation of the provisions of the Act could invoke the
provisions under the Act. In that view of the matter, the
petitioner’s complaint could not have been trashed on the ground
that the Act does not contemplate provision for men and it could only be
in respect of women.

However, the aforesaid verdict of High Court passed by Justice Anand

Byrareddy was later on withdrawn by him when an Advocate opposed the
verdict alleging that the Supreme Court’s verdict in the Hirala Harsora
case had been wrongly interpreted by the Judge.

Not Providing Maintenance is Continuing

Offence-Wife not Debarred from Seeking
Maintenance u/Domestic Violence Act even
after 3 Years
Case name: Anthony Jose v. State of NCT f Delhi & ors.

In a recent case, the High Court of Delhi analyzed the issue of quashing
of FIR/Complaint on the grounds of limitation in matrimonial offences.
The Court was of the view that in such cases the victim is subjected to
such cruelty repeatedly and it is more or less like a continuing offence.
Thus, courts while considering the question of limitation for an offence
under Section 498-A should be careful and take into consider the
interests of justice.

The High Court reiterated Supreme Court’s view in Arun Vyas Vs. Anita
Vyas, wherein it was held that the essence of the offence in Section
498-A is cruelty and is a continuing offence and on each occasion
on which the respondent was subjected to cruelty a new starting
point of limitation arises.

In view of the aforesaid observations, the Court in the instant case

refused to quash the FIR on the grounds of limitation.

Quashing of complaint under Section 12 of

Domestic Violence Act
Case name: Anthony Jose v. State of NCT of Delhi

In the case, application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act

primarily related to grant of maintenance to respondent and the minor
child. In this context, the High Court opined that non- providing of
maintenance is a continuous cause of action and even if for three
years the respondent did not claim the maintenance for herself or
for the child, the same would not debar her from seeking
maintenance under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act and
the complaint thereon cannot be dismissed being barred by
limitation.

The entire case can be accessed here.

Residence Order u/Domestic Violence Act-

Magistrate can Pass Order for Property
Situated Outside State
Case name: Ajay Kaul & ors. v. State of J&K

The law involved in the case pertained to Section 27 of the Domestic

Violence Act which deals with the Jurisdictional power of the Magistrate
and opined that according to the statutory provision only such courts are
competent to entertain a complaint where the aggrieved
person/respondent permanently or temporarily resides or carries on
business or is employed, or where cause of action arises.

While elucidating on the expression “temporarily resides” used in

Section 27, the High Court remarked that it means more than a causal
stay and implies some concrete intention to stay at a particular place. The
temporary residence means where an aggrieved person is compelled to
take shelter or to take job or do some business, in view of domestic
violence within her matrimonial home. Temporary residence so includes a
place where an aggrieved person was compelled to reside in view of
commission of domestic violence.

Thus, the High Court in the case held that there is nothing which debars
the magistrate to pass such order with regard to property situated
outside State.

The entire case can be accessed here.

 D V Act
 The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D V
Act) (D V Act), provides for effective protection of the rights of the women
guaranteed under the Constitution of India, who are victims of violence of
any kind occurring within the family, and for matters connected therewith
or incidental thereto.
The D V Act is a legislation aimed at strengthening the economic
independence of a woman. Financial deprivation of the women and their
economic abuse are dealt in it at length. As per the D V Act, it is the social
and legal obligation of the husband to make arrangement for maintenance
of the wife. The higher Courts of the Country, including the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India, have upheld this legal proposition in their multiple
judicial pronouncements, made from time to time.
The higher Courts of the Country, have however clarified it in the number
of D V Act Cases in India that the issue of economic abuse and
maintenance cannot be generalized. Every Case would need to be
examined and adjudicated upon in the backdrop of its own peculiar facts
and circumstance. The same is their view on the quantum of maintenance
amount.
The Courts have held from time to time that the amount of maintenance
fixed for wife should be such as she can live in reasonable comfort
considering her status and the mode of life she was used to when she
lived with her husband and also that she does not feel handicapped in the
prosecution of her case.
There have been instances when the Courts have directed husbands to
either get a job or dispose off his assets to maintain his estranged wife.
As for a husband, it is open for him to take a plea that it is due to the
persecution and vilification of his wife that he had to leave his job and
does not have sufficient means to support even himself what to say of the
wife. The wife, on the other hand can refute his claims and is free to
contend that he had resigned from his job just to escape from the liability
of maintenance.
For convenience sake, we have divided the topics, as given in the D V Act,
in the following categories.
To know more about D V Act, go on clicking on the following links
Maintainability Issue
 What is domestic violence
 Right to reside in a shared household
 Protection Officer
 Service Providers
 How to file a Case in the Court
 Counselling
Monetary, Custody & others
 Protection Orders
 Residence Orders
 Monetary Reliefs
 Custody Orders
 Compensation Orders
 Penalty for breach of Protection Order by Respondent
 Appeal
Criminal Courts
[In Hierarchical Order]
 Supreme Court Of India
 High Courts Of Various States- [Revision U/S- 397/ RW S-
482 CrPC lie before Session Judge]
 Sessions Judge- [Appeal U/S- 29 of the DV Act
lie before Session Judge]
 Metropolitan Magistrates [MM]/Judicial Magistrates [JM]
 Mediators & Concilliators.
Legislations Governing DV Act Issues
PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005
CHAPTER II : DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
 Section-3:Definition of domestic violence
CHAPTER III : POWERS AND DUTIES OF PROTECTION OFFICERS, SERVICE
PROVIDERS, ETC.
 Section-4: Information to Protection Officer and exclusion of
liability of informant
 Section-8: Appointment of Protection Officers
 Section-10: Service providers
 Section-11: Duties of Government
CHAPTER IV : PROCEDURE FOR OBTAINING ORDERS OF RELIEFS
 Section-12: Application to Magistrate
 Section-14: Counselling
 Section-15: Assistance of welfare expert
 Section-17: Right to reside in a shared household
 Section-18: Protection orders
 Section-19: Residence orders
 Section-20: Monetary reliefs
 Section-21: Custody orders
 Section-22: Compensation orders
 Section-23: Power to grant interim and ex parte orders
 Section-26: Relief in other suits and legal proceedings
 Section-27: Jurisdiction
 Section-29: Appeal
CHAPTER V : MISCELLANEOUS
 Section-31: Penalty for breach of protection order by
respondent
 Section-32: Cognizance and proof.
Judgments: Domestic Violence Act [D V Act]
Judgments on quashing under S-482 Cr.P.C.
 Suo Motu Versus Ushaben Kishorbhai Mistry, Criminal
Reference No. 6 Of 2015 In Special Criminal Application No. 5313 Of
2015, Judgment Dated- 27.11.2015, Bench- Jayant Patel, ACJ,
N.V.Anjaria, J. Gujrat High Court- S-482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked by High
Courts for quashing a DV Act Complaint Case before the Magistrate
[Full PDF Judgment].
Judgments On S-2(s) of DV Act [Shared Household]:
 S.R. Batra and Anr. Vs. Tarun Batra, Appeal (Civil) 5837
of 2006, Judgment dated: 15.06.2006, S.B. Sinha & Markandey Katju,
JJ, Supreme Court of India- Shared Household, as defined under
section-2(s) of D V Act- In laws’ property not covered under Shared
Household [Full PDF Judgment].
Judgments On S-2(q) of DV Act [Respondent Means]:
 Hiral P. Harsora And Ors. Versus Kusum Narottamdas Harsora
And Ors., Civil Appeal No. 10084 Of 2016, Judgment Dated:
06.10.2016, Bench: Kurian Joseph & R.F. Nariman, JJ, Supreme Court Of
India; Citation: (2016) 10 SCC 165 [Full PDF Judgment]:
Constitutional validity of Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005.- Held, "46. We, therefore, set aside the
impugned judgment of the Bombay High Court and declare that the
words “adult male” in Section 2(q) of the 2005 Act will stand deleted
since these words do not square with Article 14 of the Constitution of
India. Consequently, the proviso to Section 2(q), being rendered otiose,
also stands deleted....".
Judgments On S-19(1)(a) of DV Act [Restraining the respondent from
dispossessing the aggrieved person from the shared household, whether
or not the respondent has a legal or equitable interest in the shared
household]:
 Roma Rajesh Tiwari-BomHC-12.10.2107-S-19(1)(a)-Restraint
Orders qua Residence [Full PDF Judgment].
Judgments On S-19(b) of DV Act [Directing the respondent to remove
himself from the shared household]
 Samir Vidyasagar Bhardwaj-SC-09.05.2017-S-19(1)(b) of DV
Act- Husband can be removed from his own house [Full PDF
Judgment].
Judgments-In-General
 Abdulrahim Abdulmiya Pirzada & 1 Other Versus State Of
Gujarat & 2 Others, Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No. 3993
of 2014, Judgment Dated: 21.01.2016, Bench: J.B.Pardiwala, JJ, Gujrat
High Court-Issue, maintenance rights of the wife against her in-laws-
Held, "From the principles enunciated in the above referred decisions,
it is apparent that any right which the wife has during the subsistence
of her marriage and during the lifetime of her husband is against the
husband and she has no right to claim any relief against the father-in-
law or sister-in-law or any of the relatives of her husband inasmuch as
the obligation to maintain her lies only on her husband. The complaint
in question, therefore, appears to have been filed with the malafide
 intention to wreak vengeance for the purpose of settling personal
scores and would fall within the ambit of Illustration (7) of the
Illustrations delineated by the Supreme Court in the celebrated case of
State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC
604, viz. that the proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide
and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior
motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to
spite him due to private and personal grudge. For the aforesaid
reasons, this application is allowed. The impugned order is hereby
ordered to be quashed so far as the applicants are concerned. ".
 Amee Sharan Desai Versus Sharan Sanjeev Desai, Writ
Petition No. 8825 Of 2014, Judgment Dated: 23.08.2016, Bench: Ranjit
More, J, Bombay High Court: Issue No.1, interim maintenance
proceedings under section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance
Act, 1956.- Issue No.2, From which date the wife would be entitled
to claim the amount of maintenance pendent lite.- Referred to and
relied upon Jasbir Kaur Sehgal Versus District Judge Dehradun, (1997) 7
SCC 7; & Bhuwan Mohan Singh Versus Meena, (2015) 6 SCC 353;
where it is held by the SC that the wife is entitled in law to lead a life in
the similar manner as she would have lived in the house of her
husband. The husband cannot take subterfuges to deprive his wife of
the benefit of living with dignity.- Held, “18. Taking totality of the facts
and circumstances of the case into consideration especially the
deposits and withdrawals of amounts by the Respondent as disclosed
from the bank statement and debit card statements and statement
made by the Respondent in his reply in the DV Act proceedings, in my
opinion, the ends of justice would be met if the Respondent is directed
to pay to the Petitioner interim maintenance @ Rs.1 lac per month
from the date of the impugned order”.
 Amit Agarwal and others Versus Sanjay Aggarwal and others,
Crl. Misc. No.M-36736 of 2014 (O&M), Judgment Dated: 31.05.2016,
Bench: Anita Chaudhry, J, Punjab & Haryana High Court:
Issue, Quashing Of DV Act Complaint & Summoning Orders- Held,
"Considering the above, it is held that the present complaint is an
abuse of the process of the Court. The domestic relationship had come
to an end. The complainant had impleaded relatives who were not
 living in the shared house and permitting the Magistrate to proceed
with the complaint would be an abuse of the process of law. The
complaint and the proceedings therein are quashed.".
 Chiranjeev Kumar Arya Versus State Of U.P. & Another,
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 879 of 2015, Judgment Dated: 29.06.2016,
Bench: Sudhir Kumar Saxena ,J, Allahabad Delhi High Court-
Issue, Maintainablity of revision against against the order passed in
appeal under Section 29 of the D V Act- The HC held the Revision to be
maintainable.
 Jasbir Kaur Sehgal Versus. District Judge, Dehradun and
Ors., Judgment Dated: 27.08.1997, Bench: Sujata V. Manohar, D. P.
Wadhwa, JJ, Supreme Court Of India; Citation: (1997) 7 SCC 7: Issue
No.1, Quantum of maintenance, pendent lite, under Section 24 of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.- Issue No.2, From which date the wife
would be entitled to claim the enhanced amount
of maintenance pendent lite.- Held, “The Court has to consider the
status of the parties, their respective needs, the capacity of the
husband to pay having regard to his reasonable expenses for his own
maintenance and of those he is obliged under the law and statutory
but involuntary payments or deductions. The amount of maintenance
fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in reasonable comfort
considering her status and the mode of life she was used to when she
lived with her husband and also that she does not feel handicapped in
the prosecution of her case. At the same time, the amount so fixed
cannot be excessive or extortionate.” Further held, “The question then
arises as to from which date the wife would be entitled to claim the
enhanced amount of maintenance pendente lite. If wife has no
source of income it is the obligation of the husband to maintain her
and also children of the marriage on the basis of the provision
contained in the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. Her
right to claim maintenance fructifies on the date of the filing of the
petition for divorce under the Act. Having thus fixed the date as the
filing of the petition for divorce it is not always that the court has
to grant the maintenance from that date. The court has discretion in
the matter as to from which date maintenance under Section 24 of the
Act should be granted. The discretion of the court would depend upon
 multiple circumstance which are to be kept in view. These could be
the time taken to serve the respondent in the petition the date of filing
of the application under Section 241 of the Act; conduct of the
parties in the proceedings; averments made in the application and
the reply there to; the tendency of the wife to inflate the income out of
all proportion and that of the husband to suppress the same; and
the like. There has to be honesty of purpose for both the parties which
unfortunately we find lacking in this case. We are therefore of the
opinion that ends of justice would be met if we direct that maintenance
pendente lite as fixed by this judgment to be payable from the
date of impugned order of the High Court which is October 16, 1996.
We order accordingly. The impugned judgment of the High Court
shall stand modified to that extent.”.
 Krishna Bhatacharjee Versus Sarathi Choudhury And
Anr, Criminal Appeal No. 1545 Of 2015 (@ SLP(Crl) No. 10223 Of
2014), Judgment Dated 20.11.2015, Dipak Misra, J & Prafulla C Panta,
J, Supreme Court Of India- Judicially separated wife is an “aggrieved
person” under section 2(a) of the DV Act, 2005 Act.
 Kusum Sharma Versus Mahinder Kumar Sharma, FAO
369/1996, Judgment Dated: 14.01.2015, Bench: J R Midha, J, Delhi
High Court: Issue, Affidavit of income and assets to be filed by the
Husband & Wife in the proceedings seeking maintenance- The
following came up for discussion and consideration by the
Bench:Affidavit of income and assets provided in Form 16A of
APPENDIX-E under Order 21 Rule 41(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure-
Burden of proving the income- The following judgments were also
referred and relied upon: Puneet Kaur v. Inderjit Singh Sawhney, 2011
(183) DLT 403 and many others- Multiple directions were issued in this
Case and a format of the Affidavit of Income was also prepared and
made part of the Order/ Judgment itself, directing all the subordinate
Courts to ensure the compliance of this Judgment/ Order. Final
Conclusion in the Judgment: “Conclusion: 19. On careful consideration
of the valuable suggestions given by the Courts below, learned amici
curiae and the counsels for the parties, the order dated 18th
September, 2014 is modified and the modified directions are as under:
- 19.1 Matrimonial jurisdiction is of a special nature and deserves a
special attention. Lengthy trial in matrimonial proceedings is uncalled
for and contrary to the spirit of Hindu Marriage Act.- 19.2 The affidavit
of assets, income and expenditure of both the parties are necessary to
determine the rights of the parties under Sections 24 to 27 of the
Hindu Marriage Act and, therefore, should be filed by both the parties
at the very threshold in order to curb the delay and expedite the trial
in terms of Section 21-B of the Hindu Marriage Act.- 19.3 Applying the
aforesaid principles laid down in Section 10(3) of the Family Courts Act,
1984 read with Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act relating to the
duty of the Court to ascertain the truth and the duty of the parties to
disclose their income under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act,
this Court has formulated the format of the affidavit of assets, income
and expenditure attached to this order as Annexure ‘A’ which shall
form part of this judgment. The documents required to be filed along
with the affidavit are prescribed in the format of the affidavit.- 19.4 All
pleadings including petitions under Sections 9 to 13 of the Hindu
Marriage Act and the written statement shall be accompanied with an
affidavit of assets, income and expenditure in the format provided in
Annexure A and shall be accompanied by the relevant documents
mentioned therein.- 19.5 If the petitioner claims maintenance,
application under Section 24 should be filed along with the petition.
However, if respondent claims maintenance, the application under
Section 24 along with the affidavit of assets, income and expenditure
in the format provided in Annexure A along with the response to the
petitioner’s affidavit should be filed within 30 days of the service of the
notice.- 19.6 The response to the respondent’s affidavit of assets,
income and expenditure be filed by the petitioner within two weeks
thereafter and the case be listed for disposal of the application under
Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. If the parties are unable to file
their response within two weeks, Court may suitably extend the time
period upon sufficient cause being shown.- 19.7 The Court may also
call upon the parties of to file such an affidavit in pending cases of
maintenance if the parties have not already disclosed their true
income.-19.8 Paras 33.3 and 33.5 of the order dated 18th September,
2014 are modified to the extent that the parties shall file the affidavit
of their assets, income and expenditure in format provided in Annexure
A, instead of the affidavit prescribed in Puneet Kaur v. Inderjeet
Sawhney (supra).- 19.9 There may be cases where one of the spouse
has sufficient means of sustenance and therefore, the application
under Section 24 is not warranted at the initial stage. In such cases,
the concerned spouse need not file the application under Section 24 of
the Hindu Marriage Act but shall specifically mention this fact in the
pleadings i.e. petition/written statement, as the case may be. In such
cases, the written statement along with the affidavit in the format
provided in the Annexure A be filed by the respondent within 30 days
of the service of summons. However, this would not preclude the filing
of the application under Section 24 at a later stage, if the
circumstances so warrant.- 19.10 Even in cases where Section 24 is
not invoked by either of the parties, the affidavit of assets, income and
expenditure in terms- of Annexure A shall be filed by both the parties
for the purpose of adjudicating claims under Sections 25 to 27 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, which may be raised at a later stage. If the
affidavits of the parties are on record, the claim under Sections 25 to
27 would not delay the proceedings.- 19.11 If the claim of permanent
alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act is raised before
the appellate Court, as in the present appeals, the appellate Court can
direct the parties to file their affidavits of assets, income and
expenditure in terms of Annexure A. However, if such affidavits of the
parties are already on record, the adjudication of claim under Section
25 of the Hindu Marriage Act would not delay the proceedings.- 19.12
The Court shall ensure that the filing of the affidavits by the parties is
not reduced to a mere ritual or formality. The Court shall scrutinize the
affidavit threadbare and may decline to take the same on record
unless it contains complete particulars mentioned Annexure A and is
accompanied by the documents mentioned therein.- 19.13 If the
affidavit filed by the parties is not in the prescribed format or is not
accompanied with the relevant documents, the learned Court shall not
return it back to the filing counter as being done by same Courts. It
would be appropriate for the Court to grant reasonable time to the
parties to remove the defects/ deficiencies instead of returning back
the affidavit to the filing counter.- 19.14 If a party has made
concealment or false statement in his/her affidavit, the opposite party
shall disclose the particulars of the same in his/her response on
affidavit along with the material to show concealment or false
statement. The aggrieved party may also seek permission of the Court
to serve interrogatories and seek production of relevant documents
from the opposite party under Order XI of the Code of Civil Procedure.-
19.15 Whenever a party discloses sufficient material to show
concealment or false statement in the affidavit of the opposite party,
the Court may consider examining the deponent of the affidavit under
Section 165 of the Evidence Act to elicit the truth. In appropriate cases,
the Court may direct a party to file an additional affidavit relating to his
assets, income and expenditure at the time of marriage and/or one
year before separation and/or at the time of separation.- 19.16 If the
statements made in affidavit of assets, income and expenditure are
found to be incorrect, the Court shall consider its effect while fixing the
maintenance. However, action under Section 340 Cr.P.C. is ordinarily
not warranted in matrimonial litigation till the decision of the main
petition.- 19.17 At the time of issuing notice, the Court shall consider
directing the petitioner to deposit such sum, as the Court may consider
appropriate, on the basis of petitioner’s affidavit, for payment to the
respondent towards interim litigation/part litigation expenses.
However, in cases such as divorce petition by the wife who unable to
support herself and is claiming maintenance from the respondent
husband, it would not be appropriate to direct the petitioner-wife to
pay the litigation expenses to the respondent- husband.- 19.18 If the
disposal of maintenance application is taking time, and the delay is
causing hardship, ad-interim maintenance should be granted to the
claimant spouse on the basis of admitted income of the respondent.-
19.19 The application under Section 24 should be decided as
expeditiously as possible otherwise the very object of the proviso to
Section 24 would be defeated.- 19.20 The aforesaid procedure be
followed in all cases relating to maintenance including cases under
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956,
Special Marriage Act, 1954 Indian Divorce Act, 1869 as well as Section
125 Cr.P.C.- 19.21 It is clarified that the directions contained in the
order dated 18th September, 2014 as well as this judgment are
guidelines to determine the true income of the parties by applying the
principles laid down in Sections 106 and 165 of the Indian Evidence Act
read with Section 10(3) of the Family Courts Act, which cast a duty on
the Court to determine the true income of the parties. These directions
are necessitated because the parties in the matrimonial litigation do
not disclose their true income and the claims of maintenance are
dragged as long as upto two years and the Courts, finding it difficult to
determine the true income, tend to fix maintenance by drawing
presumptions.- 19.22 This Court would like to further clarify that while
formulating the affidavit – Annexure A, many more questions and
documents were considered, which would have complicated the
affidavit and caused inconvenience to the litigants. In order to keep the
affidavit concise and precise, this Court incorporated only important
questions and documents. However, the Courts are at liberty to direct
the parties to disclose further relevant facts and documents if deemed
necessary to determine the true income. The Courts are also at liberty
to consider Rules and formats of affidavits mentioned in para 18 to
develop and further improve the format of the affidavit formulated by
this Court.- 20. The Courts below shall send their response to the
working of these guidelines and further suggestions by 15th July, 2015,
which shall be considered by this Court thereafter.- 21. All the parties
in these appeals are directed to file fresh affidavits along with
documents in terms of the format provided in Annexure ‘A’ hereto
within six weeks. The response to the affidavits of the parties be filed
within four weeks thereafter……..24. This Court is of the view that filing
of affidavit of assets, income, expenditure and liabilities by both the
parties in the prescribed format at the very threshold of matrimonial
litigation as in developed countries would enable the Courts to pass
maintenance order within 60 days in terms of Section 24 of Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 and therefore should be incorporated in all the
matrimonial statutes. Let this suggestion be considered by the
Government. Copy of the order dated 18th September, 2014 and this
judgment along with the Annexure A and compilation of the
Rules/formats mentioned in Para 18 be sent to Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned
ASG for taking up the matter with Ministry of Law and Justice.- 25.
Copy of this judgment along with Annexure A be sent to Registrar
 General of this Court who shall send the same to all Family Courts and
other Courts dealing with matrimonial cases. The format of the
affidavit of assets, income and expenditure (Annexure A) be loaded in
the website of the District Courts/Family Courts to enable the- 26. Copy
of the order dated 18th September, 2014 as well as this judgment
along with the Annexure A be also sent to the Delhi Judicial Academy
to sensitize the judicial officers about the guidelines laid down by this
Court.”.
 Puneet Kaur Versus Inderjit Singh Sawhney, CM(M) 79/2011,
Judgment Dated: 12.09.2016, Bench: J.R. Midha, J, Delhi High Court:
Directions passed to the trial Courts as to what kind to Income Affidavit
to be procured and considered before passing the Order on
maintenance.
 Rabindra Nath Sahu Versus Susila Sahu, TRPCRL No. 20 of
2016, Judgment Dated: 14.09.2016, Bench: S.K. Sahoo, J, High Court Of
Orissa, Cuttack: DV Act- Temporary Residence.
 Sudha Mishra Vs. Surya Chandra Mishra, RFA No.299 of
2014, Order Dated: 25.07.2014, passed by A K Pathak,J, Delhi High
Court- Shared Household U/S-2(s) of D V Act.
 Sudha Mishra Vs. Surya Chandra Mishra, Special Leave
Appeal No. 23519 of 2014, Order dated: 25.02.2015, passed by Madan
B Lokur & Uday Umesh Lalit,JJ, Supreme Court Of India- Shared
Household U/S-2(s) of D V Act.
Judgments-Maintenance
 Ajay Kumar Versus Lata Alias Sharuti & Ors.- Criminal Appeal
No(S). 617 Of 2019-SC-08.04.2019- DV Act-S-12- Complaint under DV
Act- S-20- Maintenance- S-2(q)- Whether brother-in-law is Respondent
under DV Act- Ancestral Hindu Joint Family Property- S-2(f)- domestic
relationship- S-2(s)- shared household- whether the requirements of
Section 2(f), Section 2(q), and Section 2(s) are fulfilled is a matter of
evidence which will be adjudicated upon at the trial [Full PDF
Judgment].
Kindly CLICK HERE or e-mail us at office@hellocounsel.com if you are
facing any Legal Issue and want to have Legal Consultations with the
empanelled Lawyers at Hello Counsel.

Central Government Act

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules,
2006
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2006

1. Short title and commencement.—

(1) These rules may be called the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Rules, 2006.
(2) They shall come into force on the 26th day of October, 2006.
2. Definitions.—In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires,—
(a) “Act” means the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (43 of
2005);
(b) “complaint” means any allegation made orally or in writing by any person to the
Protection Officer;
(c) “Counsellor” means a member of a service provider competent to give counselling
under sub-section (1) of section 14;
(d) “Form” means a form appended to these rules;
(e) “section” means a section of the Act;
(f) words and expressions used and not defined in these rules but defined in the Act
shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the Act.
3. Qualifications and experience of Protection Officers.—
(1) The Protection Officers appointed by the State Government may be of the
Government or members of non-governmental organizations: Provided that
preference shall be given to women.
(2) Every person appointed as Protection Officer under the Act shall have at least
three years experience in social sector.
(3) The tenure of a Protection Officer shall be a minimum period of three years.
(4) The State Government shall provide necessary office assistance to the Protection
Officer for the efficient discharge of his or her functions under the Act and these rules.
4. Information to Protection Officers.—
(1) Any person who has reason to believe that an act of domestic violence has been,
or is being, or is likely to be committed may give information about it to the
Protection Officer having jurisdiction in the area either orally or in writing.
(2) In case the information is given to the Protection Officer under sub-rule (1) orally,
he or she shall cause it to be reduced to in writing and shall ensure that the same is
signed by the person giving such information and in case the informant is not in a
position to furnish written information the Protection Officer shall satisfy and keep a
record of the identity of the person giving such information.
(3) The Protection Officer shall give a copy of the information recorded by him
immediately to the informant free of cost.
5. Domestic incident reports.—
(1) Upon receipt of a complaint of domestic violence, the Protection Officer shall
prepare a domestic incident report in Form I and submit the same to the Magistrate
and forward copies thereof to the police officer in charge of the police station within
the local limits of jurisdiction of which the domestic violence alleged to have been
committed has taken place and to the service providers in that area.
(2) Upon a request of any aggrieved person, a service provider may record a domestic
incident report in Form I and forward a copy thereof to the Magistrate and the
Protection Officer having jurisdiction in the area where the domestic violence is
alleged to have taken place.
6. Applications to the Magistrate.—
(1) Every application of the aggrieved person under section 12 shall be in Form II or
as nearly as possible thereto.
(2) An aggrieved person may seek the assistance of the Protection Officer in
preparing her application under sub-rule (1) and forwarding the same to the concerned
Magistrate.
(3) In case the aggrieved person is illiterate, the Protection Officer shall read over the
application and explain to her the contents thereof.
(4) The affidavit to be filed under sub-section (2) of section 23 shall be filed in Form
III.
(5) The applications under section 12 shall be dealt with and the orders enforced in
the same manner laid down under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (2 of 1974).
7. Affidavit for obtaining ex-parte orders of Magistrate.—Every affidavit for
obtaining ex-parte order under sub-section (2) of section 23 shall be filed in Form III.
8. Duties and functions of Protection Officers.—
(1) It shall be the duty of the Protection Officer—
(i) to assist the aggrieved person in making a complaint under the Act, if the
aggrieved person so desires;
(ii) to provide her information on the rights of aggrieved persons under the Act as
given in Form IV which shall be in English or in a vernacular local language;
(iii) to assist the person in making any application under section 12, or sub-section (2)
of section 23 or any other provision of the Act or the rules made thereunder;
(iv) to prepare a “Safety Plan” including measures to prevent further domestic
violence to the aggrieved person, in consultation with the aggrieved person in Form V,
after making an assessment of the dangers involved in the situation and on an
application being moved under section 12;
(v) to provide legal aid to the aggrieved person, through the State Legal Aid Services
Authority;
(vi) to assist the aggrieved person and any child in obtaining medical aid at a medical
facility including providing transportation to get the medical facility;
(vii) to assist in obtaining transportation for the aggrieved person and any child to the
shelter;
(viii) to inform the service providers registered under the Act that their services may
be required in the proceedings under the Act and to invite applications from service
providers seeking particulars of their members to be appointed as Counsellors in
proceedings under the Act under sub-section (1) of section 14 or Welfare Experts
under section 15;
(ix) to scrutinise the applications for appointment as Counsellors and forward a list of
available Counsellors to the Magistrate;
(x) to revise once in three years the list of available Counsellors by inviting fresh
applications and forward a revised list of Counsellors on the basis thereof to the
concerned Magistrate;
(xi) to maintain a record and copies of the report and documents forwarded under
sections 9, 12, 20, 21, 22, 23 or any other provisions of the Act or these rules;
(xii) to provide all possible assistance to the aggrieved person and the children to
ensure that the aggrieved person is not victimized or pressurized as a consequence of
reporting the incidence of domestic violence;
(xiii) to liaise between the aggrieved person or persons, police and service provider in
the manner provided under the Act and these rules;
(xiv) to maintain proper records of the service providers, medical facility and shelter
homes in the area of his jurisdiction.
(2) In addition to the duties and functions assigned to a Protection Officer under
clauses (a) to (h) of sub-section (1) of section 9, it shall be the duty of every
Protection Officer—
(a) to protect the aggrieved persons from domestic violence, in accordance with the
provisions of the Act and these rules;
(b) to take all reasonable measures to prevent recurrence of domestic violence against
the aggrieved person, in accordance with the provisions of the Act and these rules.
9. Action to be taken in cases of emergency.—If the Protection Officer or a service
provider receives reliable information through e-mail or a telephone call or the like
either from the aggrieved person or from any person who has reason to believe that an
act of domestic violence is being or is likely to be committed and in a such an
emergency situation, the Protection Officer or the service provider, as the case may
be, shall seek immediate assistance of the police who shall accompany the Protection
Officer or the service provider, as the case may be, to the place of occurrence and
record the domestic incident report and present the same to the Magistrate without
any delay for seeking appropriate orders under the Act.
10. Certain other duties of the Protection Officers.—
(1) The Protection Officer, if directed to do so in writing, by the Magistrate shall—
(a) conduct a home visit of the shared household premises and make preliminary
enquiry if the court requires clarification, in regard to granting ex-parte interim relief
to the aggrieved person under the Act and pass an order for such home visit;
(b) after making appropriate inquiry, file a report on the emoluments, assets, bank
accounts or any other documents as may be directed by the court;
(c) restore the possession of the personal effects including gifts and jewellery of the
aggrieved person and the shared household to the aggrieved person;
(d) assist the aggrieved person to regain custody of children and secure rights to visit
them under his supervision as may be directed by the court;
(e) assist the court in enforcement of orders in the proceedings under the Act in the
manner directed by the Magistrate, including orders under section 12, section 18,
section 19, section 20, section 21 or section 23 in such manner as may be directed by
the court;
(f) take the assistance of the police, if required, in confiscating any weapon involved
in the alleged domestic violence.
(2) The Protection Officer shall also perform such other duties as may be assigned to
him by the State Government or the Magistrate in giving effect to the provisions of
the Act and these rules from time to time.
(3) The Magistrate may, in addition to the orders for effective relief in any case, also
issue directions relating general practice for better handling of the cases, to the
Protection Officers within his jurisdiction and the Protection Officers shall be bound
to carry out the same.
11. Registration of service providers.—
(1) Any voluntary association registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860
(21 of 1860) or a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or
any other law for time being in force with the objective of protecting the rights and
interests of women by any lawful means including providing of legal aid, medical,
financial or other assistance and desirous of providing service as a service provider
under the Act shall make an application under sub-section (1) of section 10 for
registration as service provider in Form VI to the State Government.
(2) The State Government shall, after making such enquiry as it may consider
necessary and after satisfying itself about the suitability of the applicant, register it as
a service provider and issue a certificate of such registration: Provided that no such
application shall be rejected without giving the applicant an opportunity of being
heard.
(3) Every association or company seeking registration under sub-section (1) of section
10 shall possess the following eligibility criteria, namely:—
(a) It should have been rendering the kind of services it is offering under the Act for at
least three years before the date of application for registration under the Act and these
rules as a service provider.
(b) In case an applicant for registration is running a medical facility, or a psychiatric
counselling centre, or a vocational training institution, the State Government shall
ensure that the applicant fulfils the requirements for running such a facility or
institution laid down by the respective regulatory authorities regulating the respective
professions or institutions.
(c) In case an applicant for registration is running a shelter home, the State
Government shall, through an officer or any authority or agency authorised by it,
inspect the shelter home, prepare a report and record its finding on the report,
detailing that—
(i) the maximum capacity of such shelter home for intake of persons seeking shelter;
(ii) the place is secure for running a shelter home for women and that adequate
security arrangements can be put in place for the shelter home;
(iii) the shelter home has a record of maintaining a functional telephone connection or
other communication media for the use of the inmates.
(3) The State Government shall provide a list of service providers in the various
localities to the concerned Protection Officers and also publish such list of
newspapers or on its website.
(4) The Protection Officer shall maintain proper records by way of maintenance of
registers duly indexed, containing the details of the service providers.
12. Means of service of notices.—
(1) The notices for appearance in respect of the proceedings under the Act shall
contain the names of the person alleged to have committed domestic violence, the
nature of domestic violence and such other details which may facilitate the
identification of person concerned.
(2) The service of notices shall be made in the following manner, namely:—
(a) The notices in respect of the proceedings under the Act shall be served by the
Protection Officer or any other person directed by him to serve the notice, on behalf
of the Protection Officer, at the address where the respondent is stated to be ordinarily
residing in India by the complainant or aggrieved person or where the respondent is
stated to be gainfully employed by the complainant or aggrieved person, as the case
may be.
(b) The notice shall be delivered to any person in charge of such place at the moment
and in case of such delivery not being possible it shall be pasted at a conspicuous
place on the premises.
(c) For serving the notices under section 13 or any other provision of the Act, the
provisions under Order V of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (5 of 1908) or the
provisions under Chapter VI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) as
far as practicable may be adopted.
(d) Any order passed for such service of notices shall entail the same consequences,
as an order passed under Order V of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (5 of 1908) or
Chapter VI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) respectively,
depending upon the procedure found efficacious for making an order for such service
under section 13 or any other provision of the Act and in addition to the procedure
prescribed under the Order V or Chapter VI, the court may direct any other steps
necessary with a view to expediting the proceedings to adhere to the time limit
provided in the Act.
(3) On a statement on the date fixed for appearance of the respondent, or a report of
the person authorised to serve the notices under the Act, that service has been effected
appropriate orders shall be passed by the court on any pending application for interim
relief, after hearing the complainant or the respondent, or both.
(4) When a protection order is passed restraining the respondent from entering the
shared household or the respondent is ordered to stay away or not to contact the
petitioner, no action of the aggrieved person including an invitation by the aggrieved
person shall be considered as waiving the restraint imposed on the respondent, by the
order of the court, unless such protection order is duly modified in accordance with
the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 25.
13. Appointment of Counsellors.—
(1) A person from the list of available Counsellors forwarded by the Protection
Officer, shall be appointed as a Counsellor, under intimation to aggrieved person.
(2) The following persons shall not be eligible to be appointed as Counsellors in any
proceedings, namely:—
(i) any person who is interested or connected with the subject matter of the dispute or
is related to any one of the parties or to those who represent them unless such
objection is waived by all the parties in writing.
(ii) any legal practitioner who has appeared for the respondent in the case or any other
suit or proceedings connected therewith.
(3) The Counsellors shall as far as possible be women.
14. Procedure to be followed by Counsellors.—
(1) The Counsellor shall work under the general supervision of the court or the
Protection Officer or both.
(2) The Counsellor shall convene a meeting at a place convenient to the aggrieved
person or both the parties.
(3) The factors warranting counselling shall include the factor that the respondent
shall furnish an undertaking that he would refrain from causing such domestic
violence as complained by the complainant and in appropriate cases an undertaking
that he will not try to meet, or communicate in any manner through letter or
telephone, electronic mail or through any medium except in the counselling
proceedings before the counsellor or as permissibly by law or order of a court of
competent jurisdiction.
(4) The Counsellor shall conduct the counselling proceedings bearing in mind that the
counselling shall be in the nature of getting an assurance, that the incidence of
domestic violence shall not get repeated.
(5) The respondent shall not be allowed to plead any counter justification for the
alleged act of domestic violence in counselling the fact that and any justification for
the act of domestic violence by the respondent is not allowed to be a part of the
Counselling proceeding should be made known to the respondent, before the
proceedings begin.
(6) The respondent shall furnish an undertaking to the Counsellor that he would
refrain from causing such domestic violence as complained by the aggrieved person
and in appropriate cases an undertaking that he will not try to meet, or communicate
in any manner through letter or telephone, e-mail, or through any other medium
except in the counselling proceedings before the Counsellor.
(7) If the aggrieved person so desires, the Counsellor shall make efforts of arriving at
a settlement of the matter.
(8) The limited scope of the efforts of the Counsellor shall be to arrive at the
understanding of the grievances of the aggrieved person and the best possible
redressal of her grievances and the efforts shall be to focus on evolving remedies or
measures for such redressal.
(9) The Counsellor shall strive to arrive at a settlement of the dispute by suggesting
measures for redressal of grievances of the aggrieved person by taking into account
the measures or remedies suggested by the parties for counselling and reformulating
the terms for the settlement, wherever required.
(10) The Counsellor shall not be bound by the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act,
1872 (1 of 1872) or the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), or the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), and his action shall be guided by the principles
of fairness and justice and aimed at finding way to bring an end to domestic violence
to the satisfaction of the aggrieved person and in making such an effort the Counsellor
shall give due regard to the wishes and sensibilities of the aggrieved person.
(11) The Counsellor shall submit his report to the Magistrate as expeditiously as
possible for appropriate action.
(12) In the event the Counsellor arrives at a resolution of the dispute, he shall record
the terms of settlement and get the same endorsed by the parties.
(13) The court may, on being satisfied about the efficacy of the solution and after
making a preliminary enquiry from the parties and after, recording reasons for such
satisfaction, which may include undertaking by the respondents to refrain from
repeating acts of domestic violence, admitted to have been committed by the
respondents, accept the terms with or without conditions.
(14) The court shall, on being so satisfied with the report of counselling, pass an
order, recording the terms of the settlement or an order modifying the terms of the
settlement on being so requested by the aggrieved person, with the consent of the
parties.
(15) In cases, where a settlement cannot be arrived at in the counselling proceedings,
the Counsellor shall report the failure of such proceedings to the Court and the court
shall proceed with the case in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
(16) The record of proceedings shall not be deemed to be material on record in the
case on the basis of which any inference may be drawn or an order may be passed
solely based on it.
(17) The Court shall pass an order under section 25, only after being satisfied that the
application for such an order is not vitiated by force, fraud or coercion or any other
factor and the reasons for such satisfaction shall be recorded in writing in the order,
which may include any undertaking or surety given by the respondent.
15. Breach of Protection Orders.—
(1) An aggrieved person may report a breach of protection order or an interim
protection order to the Protection Officer.
(2) Every report referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be in writing by the informant and
duly signed by her.
(3) The Protection Officer shall forward a copy of such complaint with a copy of the
protection order of which a breach is alleged to have taken place to the concerned
Magistrate for appropriate orders.
(4) The aggrieved person may, if she so desires, make a complaint of breach of
protection order or interim protection order directly to the Magistrate or the Police, if
she so chooses.
(5) If, at any time after a protection order has been breached, the aggrieved person
seeks his assistance, the protection officer shall immediately rescue her by seeking
help from the local police station and assist the aggrieved person to lodge a report to
the local police authorities in appropriate cases.
(6) When charges are framed under section 31 or in respect of offences under section
498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), or any other offence not
summarily triable, the Court may separate the proceedings for such offences to be
tried in the manner prescribed under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)
and proceed to summarily try the offence of the breach of Protection Order under
section 31, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XXI of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).
(7) Any resistance to the enforcement of the orders of the Court under the Act by the
respondent or any other person purportedly acting on his behalf shall be deemed to be
a breach of protection order or an interim protection order covered under the Act.
(8) A breach of a protection order or an interim protection order shall immediately be
reported to the local police station having territorial jurisdiction and shall be dealt
with as a cognizable offence as provided under sections 31 and 32.
(9) While enlarging the person on bail arrested under the Act, the Court may, by order,
impose the following conditions to protect the aggrieved person and to ensure the
presence of the accused before the court, which may include—
(a) an order restraining the accused from threatening to commit or committing an act
of domestic violence;
(b) an order preventing the accused from harassing, telephoning or making any
contact with the aggrieved person;
(c) an order directing the accused to vacate and stay away from the residence of the
aggrieved person or any place she is likely to visit;
(d) an order prohibiting the possession or use of firearm or any other dangerous
weapon;
(e) an order prohibiting the consumption of alcohol or other drugs;
(f) any other order required for protection, safety and adequate relief to the aggrieved
person.
16. Shelter to the aggrieved person.—
(1) On a request being made by the aggrieved person, the Protection Officer or a
service provider may make a request under section 6 to the person in charge of a
shelter home in writing, clearly stating that the application is being made under
section 6.
(2) When a Protection Officer makes a request referred to in sub-rule (1), it shall be
accompanied by a copy of the domestic incident report registered, under section 9 or
under section 10: Provided that shelter home shall not refuse shelter to an aggrieved
person under the Act, for her not having lodged a domestic incident report, prior to
the making of request for shelter in the shelter home.
(3) If the aggrieved person so desires, the shelter home shall not disclose the identity
of the aggrieved person in the shelter home or communicate the same to the person
complained against.
17. Medical facility to the aggrieved person.—
(1) The aggrieved person or the Protection Officer or the service provider may make a
request under section 7 to a person in charge of a medical facility in writing, clearly
stating that the application is being made under section 7.
(2) When a Protection Officer makes such a request, it shall be accompanied by a
copy of the domestic incident report: Provided that the medical facility shall not
refuse medical assistance to an aggrieved person under the Act, for her not having
lodged a domestic incident report, prior to making a request for medical assistance or
examination to the medical facility.
(3) If no domestic incident report has been made, the person-in-charge of the medical
facility shall fill in Form I and forward the same to the local Protection Officer.
(4) The medical facility shall supply a copy of the medical examination report to the
aggrieved person free of cost.
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2006 FORM VII [See rule
11(1)] NOTICE FOR APPEARANCE UNDER SECTION 13(1) OF THE Protection
of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 IN THE COURT OF………… P/S:
…………… IN THE MATTER OF: Ms……. COMPLAINANT VERSUS Mr……..
RESPONDENT To, Mr........................................ S/o.......................................
R/o...................................... ............................................. .............................................
WHEREAS the Petitioner has filed an application(s) under section…..of the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (43 of 2005); You are hereby
directed to appear before this Court on the…..day of……20……at…….. O’ clock in
the…..noon personally or through a duly authorised counsel of this Court to show
cause why the relief(s) claimed by the Applicant against you should not be granted,
failing which the court shall proceed ex parte against you. Given under my hand and
the seal of the Court of……on the……. day of……20.... Seal of the Court Signature