AMENDMENT CAN BE ALLOWED IN DV CASES
Posted on 09 August 2011 by THANKACHAN V P Court BOMBAY HIGH COURT Brief Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, S. 12 - Proceedings under Act are of quasi civil nature and Court has power to allow amendment of application and written statement. Citation 2010 (4) KLT 331 (Bom.) Judgement Question raised is : Whether Court has power to allow amendment of application and written statement ? Wife initiated proceedings under the Act. Husband filed written statement. Wife filed an application seeking amendment in her application. Same was allowed. It is challenged on the ground that there is no provision in the Crl. P.C. or Act allowing applicant to amend her application. High Court dismissing same held that proceedings under Act are of quasi civil nature and in such proceeding, Court would have power to allow amendment in an application and written statement. Held: The provisions of the The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, are mainly made for giving relief to the affected women, due to domestic violence etc. The respondent in such case is not an accused, until he commits a breach of an order passed by the Court under the provisions of the Act. It is only after such breach, the respondent is treated as an accused under S.31 of the Act. In other words, the proceeding under the Act are of the quasi civil nature and in such proceeding, the Court would have power to allow amendment in an application and written statement. (para. 4) ORDER 1. This Writ Petition is challenging the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kopargaon, District Ahmednagar in Criminal Revision Application No.52/2009. 2. The respondent No. 1 initiated proceeding before learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Rahata under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the petitioner and his relatives. The petitioners appeared before the Court and filed the written statement. Thereafter, on 1st September, 2009, the respondent No. 1/wife filed an application seeking amendment in her application. The learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class) sought the petitioners' response to such application which was submitted in writing. However, before passing of the order, the learned Judicial Magistrate, did not hear oral submissions of the advocate of the petitioners. The petitioners then moved an application to the learned Magistrate for recalling of the order. They urged the Magistrate to hear them and then pass an order on the application once again. The learned Magistrate rejected their application. So, the petitioners went in revision. The revisional Court rejected the revision mainly on the merits, holding that the amendment in the application was permissible and no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners. 3. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner asserted that there is no provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in the The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (for short the Act), allowing applicant to amend her application. He invited my attention to the provisions of S.12 of the Act and R.6 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2006 (for short the Rules). R.6 specifically mentions that, an application under S.12, should be dealt with and the orders made under the Act should be enforced in the same manner laid down under S.125 of Cr.PC. In @page-KLT333# other words, it is clear that an application under S.12 or for that matter, applications under Ss.18,19,20,22 etc., of the Act, are required to be passed, like the orders are passed on an application under S.125 and the related provisions. 4. It is clear that the provisions of the The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, are mainly made for giving relief to the affected women, due to domestic violence etc.. The respondent in such case is not an accused, until he commits a breach of an order passed by the Court under the provisions of the Act. It is only after such breach, the respondent is treated as an accused under S.31 of the Act. In other words, the proceeding under the Act are of the quasi civil nature and in such proceeding, the Court would have power to allow amendment in an application and written statement. 5. The petition should fail. It stands dismissed. The lower Court shall decide the application within six months at least from today.
