Protection Order Under DV Act: Section 468 CrPC Applicable Only At Cognizance Stage U/S 32 Of DV Act, Not Prior To It: Patna High Court

The petitioner in the orders was directed by the courts below to provide proper and safe accommodation to his wife either in the same house or a separate house, as per her preference, and to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month for her maintenance. 

In revision before the high court, advocate Chandra Mohan Jha, representing the petitioner, raised three main arguments against the orders. He contended that the order for residence cannot be an interim order and therefore, the original court's order and the trial court's affirmation of it should be set aside.

It was also argued that the monthly maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- is arbitrary and should be based on the petitioner's capacity to pay. It was also contended that the court must first establish the existence of domestic violence before providing relief under the Domestic Violence Act.

Additionally, the counsel also argued that Section 468 of Cr.P.C., which pertains to limitation in taking cognizance, is applicable in this case.

The counsel representing the State, however, argued that both the orders were passed in accordance with law. He further submitted that Section 23 of the Act empowers the court to grant interim and ex-parte orders.

The court said it is admitted that a woman, who is subjected to domestic violence, has the right to file an application for interim as well as residential relief.

The court then noted that the order to provide proper and safe accommodation for the petitioner's wife  in the house or in a separate house, and to pay Rs.20,000/- for her maintenance is essentially a protection order under Section 18 of the Domestic Violence Act.

"This Court is of the view that Section 468 of Cr.P.C. has applicability in the matter of Domestic Violence only at the stage of applicability of Section 32 of Domestic Violence Act where question of taking cognizance is involved. So far as applicability of Section 468 of Cr.P.C. is concerned, this section shall not apply in Domestic Violence Act prior to Section 32 of Domestic Violence Act."

Such an order can be passed to prohibit the respondents when the court is prima facie satisfied that domestic violence has occurred or is likely to occur, the court said. While dismissing the revision, the court said the impugned order is basically an interim order and is fit to be sustained.

Case Title: Amit Kumar and Ors vs. The State of Bihar and Ors CRIMINAL REVISION No.993 of 2019

Click Here To Read/Download Order