The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was introduced with a simple but important objective: to provide women facing domestic violence with quick and effective legal remedies. The entire scheme of the Act provides for essentially civil remedies, except for one provision, i.e. Section 31 of the Act.
Section 31 of the Act reads as follows:
31. Penalty for breach of protection order by respondent.—
(1) A breach of protection order, or of an interim protection order, by the respondent shall be an offence under this Act and shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to twenty thousand rupees, or with both.
(2) The offence under sub-section (1) shall as far as practicable be tried by the Magistrate who had passed the order, the breach of which has been alleged to have been caused by the accused.
(3) While framing charges under sub-section (1), the Magistrate may also frame charges under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or any other provision of that Code or the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), as the case may be, if the facts disclose the commission of an offence under those provisions.
Furthermore, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2006, framed under Section 37 of the Act, provide for a detailed procedure to be followed upon breach of a Protection Order. Rule 15 of the 2006 Rules provides that in case there is a breach of a protection order, the same may be reported by the aggrieved person to a protection officer. The Protection Officer is obligated to forward the said report to the concerned Magistrate. The aggrieved person can also directly approach the Magistrate raising her grievance regarding the breach of the protection order.
Sub-Rule (7) of Rule 15 creates a deemed fiction and extends the purview of the breach. It stipulates that any resistance offered by the respondent perpetrator/ husband or any other person against the enforcement of the orders passed under the Act, be it Protection Order, Residence Order, or any order, then in such a case, it shall be deemed to be the breach of protection order or interim protection order, and appropriate proceedings may be initiated against the perpetrator under Section 31 of the Act.
However, every act of domestic violence does not automatically attract Section 31. Section 31 comes into play only when a protection order or an interim protection order passed by a Magistrate is violated. In other words, the offence is not the act of domestic violence itself, but the disobedience of a court order meant to safeguard the aggrieved woman. This distinction is important because it reflects the legislative intent behind the Act.
Increasing Cases of Domestic Violence against the Family of the Husband
Latest trends in judicial experience show that the complaint or first information report submitted by the wife against the husband and in-laws is also submitted as an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Based on similar or identical allegations, orders, sometimes even ex parte, are passed under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 of the Act.
The entire family of the husband is roped in such matters. In certain cases, even the relatives who have never had a domestic relationship with the wife are roped in.
In such cases, remedy is available before the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for quashing of the entire proceeding arising out of the application under Section 12 of the Act.
Quashing of Proceedings under Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act
In some cases, due to misinterpretation of law or pure mischief, if the monetary orders are not complied with, or any order is not complied with, proceedings under Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act are initiated against the husband and the in-laws. In some cases, the in-laws are not even aware of such proceedings. This leads to criminal action against the in-laws, which can cause irreparable loss to those relatives living away in distinct and far-off places.
In such cases, an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 can be preferred before the Allahabad High Court praying for quashing the entire proceeding under Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, as Section 31 can only be invoked upon breach of protection order, and not upon non-compliance.
To challenge the proceedings under Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, one can press the ground of maintainability of such proceedings. In such cases, since the entire case is criminal in nature, the complaint must subscribe to the provisions of Rule 15 of the 2006 Rules. Non-compliance with Rule 15 may become fatal to the entire case, coupled with other circumstances. Moreover, if no offence is made out at all or no allegation is made against a specific accused and only vague and omnibus allegations are made, then in such a case, proceedings may be quashed.
The Supreme Court has recognised the Domestic Violence Act as a beneficial piece of social welfare legislation; however, it cannot be used as a weapon against innocent relatives living far away roped in the conflict due to marital discord between husband and wife.
The scheme of Domestic Violence Law was conceived with a very strong objective, i.e. to curb domestic violence inside homes, and the entire scheme of the Act is singularly concentrated upon this. However, with time, this has just been added into the armoury of legal weapons launched against the in-laws to create pressure, and the objective has lost its relevance. The misuse is apparent, and as such, the Trial Courts have the onerous duty to separate the grain from the chaff, the legitimate cases of domestic violence from the false and frivolous complaints. This can only be done upon proper appreciation of evidence and due application of judicial mind.