Bailable Warrants in Domestic Violence Cases Only in Exceptional Circumstances - Domestic Violence Act Cases Are Primarily Remedial, Not Punitive: Supreme Court

Supreme Court of India clarified the nature of cases under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act), asserting that these are predominantly quasi-criminal proceedings aimed at providing remedial relief to victims, rather than punitive sanctions. This decision has significant implications for procedural actions such as issuing bailable warrants in such cases.

The ruling came in Alisha Berry v. Neelam Berry (Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 856/2024), where the petitioner, a young woman embroiled in a domestic dispute with her mother-in-law, sought a transfer of the case for reasons of convenience.

Quasi-Criminal Nature of Domestic Violence Proceedings
The Court emphasized that proceedings under the D.V. Act primarily aim to safeguard the rights of women and ensure immediate relief from violence, rather than imposing criminal liability. Justice Bhat, delivering the judgment, stated:
"The remedial and protective objectives of the D.V. Act must not be diluted by unnecessary criminalization of the process."

Restriction on Bailable Warrants
The judgment clarified that bailable warrants should not be routinely issued in domestic violence cases unless there is a specific breach of protection orders or non-compliance with court directions.

Focus on Litigant Convenience
Highlighting the practical struggles of women litigants, the Court reiterated the importance of ensuring that the justice system remains accessible and non-burdensome. In this case, the petitioner demonstrated her challenges in attending hearings in Delhi, including her financial constraints and the responsibility of caring for a special-needs child.

Mother-in-Law's Domestic Violence Case Transferred to Ludhiana for Daughter-in-Law's Convenience

The petitioner, Alisha Berry, argued that her financial dependency and the responsibility of raising her special-needs child left her unable to contest the case in Delhi. The Court found her arguments compelling and transferred the proceedings to Ludhiana, where she resides. This decision reaffirms the judiciary's sensitivity to the unique burdens faced by women in domestic cases.

Justice Bhat remarked:
"Litigants should not face additional hurdles in accessing justice, especially in family disputes where emotional and financial pressures already weigh heavily."

A Balancing Act Between Protection and Prosecution: Supreme Court's Stance on Domestic Violence Act

This ruling underscores a progressive approach by the judiciary in balancing the remedial goals of the D.V. Act with procedural fairness. By discouraging unwarranted criminalization, the judgment aims to preserve the dignity of the complainants while preventing misuse of the law.

The Court's nuanced perspective reflects an understanding of the D.V. Act as a framework for empowerment rather than punishment, fostering harmony and compliance rather than escalating conflicts.

Date of Decision: January 3, 2025