[DV Act] Arrest Warrants Unjustified In Domestic Violence Cases Since Proceedings Are Civil In Nature: J&K High Court

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar while hearing a petition challenging the issuance of such warrants, observed that proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act) are inherently civil in nature and not criminal.

The order was passed while addressing a petition filed by petitioner Kamran Khan and others against Bilkees Khanam.

Background of the Case:

The petitioners had challenged a petition filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the DV Act and the subsequent order by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Baramulla, which issued process against them. According to the petitioners, Kamran Khan married Bilkees Khanam in 2021, and no children were born from this marriage.

The petitioners argued that the respondent filed the DV Act petition based on false allegations. They contended that the learned trial court, without proper consideration, issued summons and even warrants of arrest against them, despite the civil nature of DV Act proceedings.

The petitioners also claimed that the discord was due to the respondent's cruel behavior and her tendency to involve Kamran Khan's entire family in frivolous cases to seek revenge.

Court's Observations:

Adjudicating the matter Justice Dhar emphasized that proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act are civil, not criminal. Hence, a Magistrate should not use coercive measures like warrants of arrest to ensure the presence of respondents, he underscored.

The Court stated that if the petitioners failed to respond to the summons, the appropriate course of action for the trial court was to proceed ex parte, rather than issuing warrants of arrest.

Noting that the petitioners had appeared before the trial court and filed their reply to the petition the court remarked,

“In view of this, the warrants of arrest stated to have been issued by the learned Magistrate against the petitioner are not in operation. Therefore, there is no requirement of passing any direction to the learned trial Magistrate in this regard”.

Addressing the allegations of Frivolity the Court pointed out that the trial Magistrate could consider the petitioners' claims of the petition being vengeful and based on false allegations while reviewing their reply. The Magistrate holds the authority to recall orders and dismiss petitions if the reply is deemed substantial, the bench stated while adding,

“Therefore, in the instant case, it would be open to the learned Magistrate to pass appropriate orders upon consideration of the reply filed by the petitioners and it would also be open to him to consider the application for dropping of proceedings, if and when the same is made by the petitioners herein”

Granting the petitioners the liberty to approach the trial Magistrate with an application to drop the proceedings the court directed the trial Magistrate to handle such applications expeditiously, considering the parties' pleadings.

Case Title: KAMRAN KHAN AND & ORS. Vs BILKEES KHANAM

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 204

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment