Judicial Divergence on Section 482 Cr.P.C. in Domestic Violence Cases: Conflicting High Court Rulings and the Need for Clarity

Gist of Recent High Court Rulings on Section 482 Cr.P.C. in Domestic Violence Act Cases

There has been judicial divergence across various High Courts regarding the applicability of Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act). Some courts have affirmed the power of High Courts to invoke Section 482, while others have ruled it inapplicable to DV cases. The key rulings are summarized below:

1. Punjab & Haryana High Court (Landmark Ruling on Section 482 Cr.P.C. in DV Cases)

• Held that Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked in cases under the Domestic Violence Act.

• Stressed that the DV Act proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature, making them amenable to inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

• This ruling provides relief to those facing frivolous or malicious complaints under the DV Act by allowing quashing at an early stage.

• Impact: Strengthens the position that High Courts can intervene to prevent abuse of process in DV Act cases.

📌 Source: Punjab & Haryana HC Judgment

2. Bombay High Court (August 2023 Ruling on Section 482 Cr.P.C. & DV Act)

• Reiterated that Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash DV Act proceedings in appropriate cases.

• Distinguished between criminal offenses under the DV Act (e.g., breach of protection orders under Section 31) and civil reliefs (monetary relief, residence orders, etc.).

• Emphasized that in cases where the complaint is baseless or an abuse of process, the High Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction.

• Impact: Aligns with the view that DV Act cases are not purely civil and can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when warranted.

📌 Source: Bombay HC Judgment

3. Punjab & Haryana High Court (Tribune India Report – Confirmation of Section 482 Applicability)

• Once again, the Punjab & Haryana HC reinforced that Section 482 Cr.P.C. applies to Domestic Violence cases.

• Clarified that DV proceedings, though civil in relief, involve criminal law principles, allowing inherent powers to be exercised for quashing.

• Impact: Adds weight to the argument that High Courts can intervene in DV matters through Section 482 Cr.P.C.
  

📌 Source: Tribune India Report

4. Allahabad High Court (Smt. Suman Mishra v. State of U.P. – Referral to Larger Bench)

• Ruled that applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. were not maintainable to challenge the issuance of notice in DV cases.

• The court found that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kamatchi vs. Lakshmi Narayanan (2022) supported the view that DV proceedings are not strictly criminal in nature.

• However, due to conflicting judgments across different High Courts, the matter was referred to a larger bench for a definitive ruling on:

  • Whether Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked in all DV Act proceedings.

  • Or if only certain categories of DV cases are amenable to quashing under inherent jurisdiction.

• Impact: Creates uncertainty until the larger bench decides, as different High Courts have taken different views.

📌 Source: Allahabad HC Judgment

Conclusion: Divergent Views & Need for Supreme Court Clarification

• Punjab & Haryana HC and Bombay HC: Held that Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be used to quash DV Act cases.

• Allahabad HC: Held that Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not applicable for challenging notice issuance in DV cases and referred the matter to a larger bench.

• Legal Implication: Until the Supreme Court or a larger bench of the High Courts resolves the issue, there will be inconsistency in how different High Courts apply Section 482 Cr.P.C. to DV Act cases.

Thus, litigants must carefully consider which High Court’s jurisdiction applies when seeking quashing of DV Act proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C..