Proceedings Under Section 12 Of DV Act Can Be Challenged Only Under Article 227, Not Section 482 CrPC: Madras High Court Full Bench

A Full Bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday held that proceedings under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act can be challenged in the High Court only under Article 227 of the Constitution and not by invoking the court's power under Section 482 CrPC.

The matter was referred to the bench of Justice PN Prakash, Justice RMT Teeka Raman and Justice AD Jagadish Chandira after Justice N Satish Kumar, while considering a batch of petitions seeking to quash the application filed under Section 12 of the DV Act by invoking the provision under Section 482 CrPC, in an order observed that a division bench's recent ruling on the legal question was not in consonance with the Supreme Court decisions. 

A division bench of the court which ruled that proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act are civil in nature had also observed that Section 482 CrPC petition is maintainable in Domestic Violence Act proceedings. However, according to the single judge, the decision was not in consonance with the decisions of the Supreme Court and thus, he referred the matter to a larger bench to answer the following questions:

• Whether a proceeding under Section 12 of the D.V.Act can be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution or under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.?
• Whether the aforesaid remedy is available to an aggrieved person before approaching the learned Magistrate and, if necessary, the Court of Sessions by way of an appeal under Section 29 of the D.V.Act?

While disposing of the petition, the larger bench observed that the High Court did not have the powers to quash proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act through Section 482 of CrPC. It observed that this is because, under the Domestic Violence Act, a Magistrate court is the designated court to hear applications. Since Magistrate's court is not a criminal court, a petition under Section 482 is not maintainable. The High Court could thus entertain challenges against proceedings under Domestic Violence Act only under Article 227.

The court thus upheld the decision of a single bench of the Madras High Court in Dr.P.Pathamnathan v. V.Monica to hold that proceedings under the DV Act are civil in nature. 

In the above case, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh looked into the Statement of Objects of the Domestic Violence Act which spells out that the Act has been enacted mainly to address the absence of civil law remedies to the victims of an offence under Section 498-A IPC and also to provide a remedy under civil law to protect the women from being a victim of Domestic Violence and to prevent such occurrences.

The full bench also observed that proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act could not be transferred to the Family Courts since these courts only had additional jurisdiction to deal with such matters. The court added that an aggrieved person could file an appeal in the Sessions Court and then approach the High Court in further appeal under Article 227 but not under Section 482 of CrPC.

The full court further clarified that the order shall be applicable only prospectively. Therefore, those cases where the matter was already transferred to the Family Court need not be interfered with at this point by way of the High Court order, it added.

"What has already happened, let it be. Why should we open a Pandora's Box. Since these disputes are matrimonial in nature, it will further prolong the agony of the parties if it is transferred from one court to another," the court observed.

Case Title: Arul Daniel v Suganya and other connected matters

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 467

Case No: Crl OP 31852 of 2022

Click here to read/download judgment