Important Elements for Section 12 Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005

Overview

Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) allows an aggrieved person to file an application before a Magistrate seeking various reliefs related to domestic violence. The Act aims to provide effective protection to women who are victims of domestic violence and to ensure their rights are upheld.

Key Elements

1. Definition of Aggrieved Person

• An aggrieved person is defined under Section 2(a) as any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and alleges to have been subjected to domestic violence Mahinkutty S/o Abdul Karim VS Anshida D/o Ibrahim - KeralaManju A. Nair VS State of Kerala - Current Civil Cases.

2. Domestic Violence Definition

• Domestic violence is defined in Section 3 and includes physical, emotional, verbal, and economic abuse. The occurrence of such violence must be established for relief to be granted Mahinkutty S/o Abdul Karim VS Anshida D/o Ibrahim - KeralaBharti RamanPandey VS Preeti Pandey - Madhya Pradesh.

3. Filing the Application

• The application can be filed by the aggrieved person or by a Protection Officer on her behalf. It must be presented to the Magistrate seeking one or more reliefs under the Act Kanaka Kedar Sapre VS Kedar Narhar Sapre - BombayBharti RamanPandey VS Preeti Pandey - Madhya Pradesh.

4. Types of Reliefs Available

• Reliefs that can be sought under Section 12 include:
• Protection Orders (Section 18)
• Residence Orders (Section 19)
• Monetary Reliefs (Section 20)
• Custody Orders (Section 21)
• Compensation Orders (Section 22) Kanaka Kedar Sapre VS Kedar Narhar Sapre - BombayBharti RamanPandey VS Preeti Pandey - Madhya Pradesh.

5. Requirement of Evidence

• The aggrieved person must establish the occurrence of domestic violence to claim any relief. The Magistrate has the discretion to allow evidence by affidavit and can devise its own procedure for the proceedings Samirkumar Chandubhai Joshi VS State Of Gujarat - GujaratBharti RamanPandey VS Preeti Pandey - Madhya Pradesh.

6. Role of Protection Officers

• Protection Officers are mandated to assist the aggrieved person in filing the application and may provide necessary reports to the Magistrate Mahinkutty S/o Abdul Karim VS Anshida D/o Ibrahim - KeralaKanaka Kedar Sapre VS Kedar Narhar Sapre - Bombay.

7. Judicial Discretion

• The Magistrate has the authority to evolve procedures for the disposal of applications under Section 12, ensuring that the process is sensitive to the needs of the aggrieved person Samirkumar Chandubhai Joshi VS State Of Gujarat - GujaratBharti RamanPandey VS Preeti Pandey - Madhya Pradesh.

Limitations and Considerations

• The application under Section 12 cannot be disposed of without allowing the parties to lead evidence. The court must consider any Domestic Incident Report received from the Protection Officer before passing any orders Kanaka Kedar Sapre VS Kedar Narhar Sapre - BombayBharti RamanPandey VS Preeti Pandey - Madhya Pradesh.
• The Act is designed to be beneficial and protective, emphasizing the need for a sensitive approach in handling cases of domestic violence Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - Supreme CourtKrishna Bhatacharjee VS Sarathi Choudhury - Supreme Court.

Conclusion

Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 provides a crucial legal framework for women seeking protection from domestic violence. It emphasizes the need for evidence of domestic violence, the role of Protection Officers, and the discretion of the Magistrate in ensuring justice. Legal practitioners should ensure that applications are well-supported by evidence and that the rights of the aggrieved person are upheld throughout the process.

Recommendations

• Ensure thorough documentation and evidence collection to support claims of domestic violence.
• Utilize the services of Protection Officers to facilitate the application process.
• Be prepared to present evidence in a manner that aligns with the court''s discretion to allow affidavits and other forms of evidence.

References: Mahinkutty S/o Abdul Karim VS Anshida D/o Ibrahim - KeralaSamirkumar Chandubhai Joshi VS State Of Gujarat - GujaratBharti RamanPandey VS Preeti Pandey - Madhya PradeshKanaka Kedar Sapre VS Kedar Narhar Sapre - BombaySatish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - Supreme CourtKrishna Bhatacharjee VS Sarathi Choudhury - Supreme CourtManju A. Nair VS State of Kerala - Current Civil Cases.].