Recently, the Delhi High Court dealt with a matter concerning the intersection of the Family Court Act, 1984, and the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, particularly addressing whether cases filed under the Domestic Violence Act can be transferred to Family Courts without causing prejudice to the respondent. The court observed that while the Family Court has jurisdiction to hear such matters, the rights of the parties under the Domestic Violence Act must be preserved, ensuring that eh respondent is not prejudiced by the transfer.
Brief Facts:
The petition filed under Section 407 of the Cr.P.C., seeks to transfer a domestic violence case from the court of the Ld. MM, East District, Karkadooma Courts, Delhi to the Ld. Judge, Family Court, Saket, Delhi. The petitioner requests that this case be clubbed with a pending divorce case in the same Family Court.
The respondent initiated divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act and subsequently filed a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, seeking various reliefs. The petitioner argues for the transfer of the DV Act, which allows for reliefs to be pursued in any civil or criminal court, and Sections 7 and 8 of the Family Court Act, 1984, which delineate the Family Court’s jurisdiction. The petitioner contends that transferring the case would benefit both parties and serve the interest of justice, as both cases are at an initial stage with no prejudice to either party.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The counsel for the petitioner contended that the allegations in both the divorce petition and the domestic violence complaint are similar, and the cases have been filed merely to harass the petitioner. It was argued that Section 26 of the Domestic Violence Act allows for relief under Sections 18 to 22 to be granted by a Family Court, civil court, or criminal court, and therefore, the Family Court is competent to handle the Domestic Violence case as well.
The counsel further relied on several precedents, including Garima Khera v. Anmol Kera, [2022 SCC OnLine Del 4117], where the court directed that maintenance and Domestic Violence petitions be tried together by the same court. The Bombay High Court’s rulings in Rohan Shah vs. Nishigandha Shah and Sandip Mrinmoy Chakrabarty vs. Reshita Sandip Chakrabarty were also cited to support the argument that Family Courts can competently try Domestic Violence cases. It was submitted by the counsel that transferring the Domestic Violence case would prevent conflicting judgments since the issues in both cases are identical.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The counsel for the respondent argued that the petition was frivolous and should be dismissed, asserting that only the Magistrate has the authority to decide matters under the Domestic Violence Act, not the Family Court. The counsel contended that Section 26 of the Domestic Violence Act has been misinterpreted by the petitioner and does not confer power on the Family Court to adjudicate applications under Section 12 of the Act.
Further, it was argued that transferring the Domestic Violence case to the Family Court would contradict the legislative intent of the Domestic Violence Act, which aims for expeditious disposal. Precedents, including those from the Kerala and Madras High Courts, were cited to support the view that applications under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act should remain with the Magistrate, and transferring the matter would be improper.
Observation of the Court:
The court observed that the Family Court Act, 1984, was enacted to ensure speedy trial and quick disposal of matrimonial disputes. Section 7 of the Act confers jurisdiction to the Family Court over matrimonial matters, including annulment of marriage, judicial separation, and maintenance. The court also highlighted that the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was designed to provide civil remedies to protect women from domestic violence and covers a broad spectrum of relationships, including marital, familial, and domestic arrangements.
It further observed that while both the Family Court Act and the Domestic Violence Act operate in different spheres, they share a common objective of protecting women in domestic or matrimonial relationships. The court noted that Section 26 of the Domestic Violence Act allows reliefs available under the Act to be sought in any legal proceedings, including those before a Family Court. The Court also noted that “The DV Act conferred the power on the judicial Magistrate to deal with the application under Section 12. The appeal was also provided under Section 29 to the Court of the Session. The Scheme of the Act also makes it clear that the Family Court or other Civil Court do not have original jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act”.Regarding the petitioner’s plea for transferring the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act to the Family Court, the Court noted that both the Bombay High Court and Kerala High Court have addressed this issue with differing conclusions. The Court emphasized that while there is no explicit bar on the Family Court hearing domestic violence cases, the broader implications of such transfers need careful consideration, particularly since many litigants may seek similar relief. The Court highlights “The Scheme of the Family Court Act and DV Act and in particular Section 26 (3) of the DV Act makes it clear that though the relief under Section 18 to 22 can be granted by the Family Court or Civil Court, however, the original jurisdiction to file the application under Section 12 is only with the jurisdictional magistrate. Thus, it cannot be said that the jurisdiction of the Family Court and the DV Act Court are concurrent”.
In conclusion, the court considered that the transfer of proceedings from a magistrate to the Family Court would not necessarily cause prejudice to the respondent. It noted that the issues raised in the case have significant legal implications and require adjudication to ensure uniformity in handling such matters in the future.
The Decision of the Court:
The court held that both the Family Court Act, 1984, and the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, aim to protect women’s rights in domestic and matrimonial matters. While operating in different spheres, Section 26 of the Domestic Violence Act allows relief to be sought in ongoing legal proceedings, including those before Family Courts. Referring to previous judgments, the court found no bar on transferring domestic violence cases to Family Courts and concluded that such transfers would not prejudice the respondent, ensuring a consistent approach in handling these cases.
Citation: TR.P.(CRL.) 23/2024, CRL.M.A. 7872/2024
Coram: Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, Garima Bajaj, Kumar Karan, Kanav Agarwal, Shagun Agarwal, Shivansh Dwivedi, Sajag Awasthi, Advs.
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Sumit Ahuja,
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
~Siddharth Raghuvanshi
Picture Source :
