The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that applications filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) cannot be dismissed on the ground of limitation under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The court clarified that limitation applies only to penal proceedings for breach of protection orders and not to original complaints of domestic violence.
Background of the Case
The ruling came in a petition filed by Tilak Raj, who had approached the High Court seeking quashing of a complaint lodged by his estranged wife Darshana Devi. She had alleged domestic violence, assault, and dowry demands in 2019, and filed her case before the Magistrate in 2022. The petitioner argued that since the complaint was filed more than two years after the alleged incidents, it was barred under Section 468 of the CrPC.
Read also:- Karnataka High Court Convicts Benaka Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. and Director in Cheque Bounce Case
Justice M.A. Chowdhary, while dismissing the petition, observed that the DV Act was enacted to provide effective protection to women against violence within families. Referring to previous Supreme Court rulings, the court explained that applications under Section 12 are civil in nature and cannot be equated with criminal complaints under Section 200 CrPC.
"The bar of limitation under Section 468 CrPC will apply only to penal proceedings under Section 31 of the DV Act for breach of protection orders, not to applications under Section 12 or Section 23," the court held.
Read also:- Madras High Court Allows Vinayagar Chaturthi Celebrations with Strict Eco-Friendly Guidelines
It relied on the Supreme Court's 2022 judgment in Kamatchi v. Lakshmi Narayanan, which had made a similar distinction.
The court further cited Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi v. Vidhi Rawal (2025), where the apex court had cautioned that while petitions under Section 482 CrPC challenging DV Act proceedings are maintainable, High Courts must exercise such powers sparingly and only in cases of gross illegality.
With this interpretation, the High Court dismissed Tilak Raj's petition as "misconceived and devoid of merit." The trial court has now been directed to proceed with Darshana Devi’s complaint expeditiously.
Case Title: Tilak Raj v. Darshana Devi
Case Number: CRM(M) No. 864/2023
