The Karnataka High Court ruled that Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act applies exclusively to breaches of protection orders, not maintenance orders, ruling out jail for non-payment. This judgment clarifies that non-compliance with monetary relief does not attract criminal liability under Section 31 of the DV Act.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
BENGALURU: In an important ruling that clarifies the scope of Section 31 under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Karnataka High Court has held that non-compliance with a maintenance order does not constitute a breach punishable under Section 31.
This decision reaffirms the principle of strict interpretation of penal provisions and distinguishes between “protection orders” and other forms of relief under the Act.
ALSO READ: Husband Rolling In Money: Court Raises Domestic Violence Compensation to Rs 1 Crore
Background
The case emerged from a petition filed by a woman in Bengaluru, who sought Rs. 20,000 as monthly maintenance, Rs. 15 lakh for marriage expenses, and return of her gold jewellery.
She also moved for interim maintenance under Section 23(2) of the DV Act, and the Magistrate granted Rs. 3,000 per month as interim maintenance in November 2014. In December, the respondent-husband paid Rs. 8,000 and requested additional time to clear the rest.
However, in 2015, the woman lodged a criminal complaint under Section 31 of the DV Act, alleging that the husband had breached the interim order by not paying maintenance.
The Magistrate, after inquiry, convicted the respondent in January 2017, sentencing him to six months’ simple imprisonment or Rs. 20,000 fine. The husband challenged the conviction, and the Sessions Court set it aside.
Unhappy with this decision, the woman approached the High Court, arguing that the husband was liable for punishment under Section 31 for non-compliance with the interim maintenance order.
High Court’s Reasoning
Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar, while dismissing the woman’s petition, clearly demarcated the boundaries of Section 31:
- Section 31 applies solely to protection orders under Section 18 and does not extend to orders for residence, monetary relief, custody, or compensation under Sections 19 to 22.
- The language of the statute is clear and unambiguous, and courts cannot expand the scope of criminal provisions through interpretation.
- Citing legislative intent, the Court emphasized that the lawmakers intentionally excluded monetary orders from Section 31, keeping punishment limited to breaches of protection orders.
- The Court also expressed practical concerns; if failure to pay maintenance were treated as a punishable offence under Section 31, it could lead to an overburdening of the criminal justice system with such cases, which the legislature likely sought to avoid.
Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act
Domestic violence refers to a pattern of abusive behavior used by one partner to exert power and control over another in an intimate relationship. It can take many forms, physical, sexual, emotional, psychological, economic, or technological, and includes actions or threats that intimidate, manipulate, humiliate, isolate, or harm the victim.
Domestic violence affects individuals of all genders, sexual orientations, ages, races, religions, and socioeconomic backgrounds. It can occur in both heterosexual and same-sex relationships, whether the partners are married, cohabiting, dating, or co-parenting.
The impact of domestic violence extends beyond the victim to family, friends, co-workers, and the wider community. Children who witness abuse often suffer long-term emotional and social harm and are at higher risk of becoming victims or perpetrators of violence themselves.
Legal Protection:
Legal protections play a crucial role in addressing and preventing domestic violence. One of the most significant legal measures is the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), 2005.
Enacted to combat domestic abuse, the PWDVA is a landmark law that brings women’s human rights into the private sphere of the home, traditionally a site of unaddressed violence. The Act empowers victims by offering:
- Protection orders restraining the abuser from contacting or approaching the victim
- Financial support for the survivor
- Access to shared household property, ensuring the victim’s right to residence
This legislation provides a comprehensive framework for safety, shelter, and legal redress, reinforcing the state’s commitment to protecting women from domestic abuse.
Section 31, DV Act:
“As per section 31 of the DV Act, a penalty is only imposed on the breach of “protection order” or “interim protection order” and not on the breach of any other order.”
In a recent case, Akshay Thakur v. State of H.P. & Ors. (2025), the bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla has held that Section 31 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 applies only to breaches of protection orders, not to non-compliance with maintenance, compensation, or residence orders.
Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, establishes a specific offence for the violation of protection orders or interim protection orders issued under the Act. It prescribes a punishment of up to one year of imprisonment, a fine up to Rs. 20,000, or both for such breaches.
Subsection (2) mandates, where practicable, that the same Magistrate who issued the order should try the offence. Under subsection (3), the Magistrate may also frame additional charges under Section 498A IPC or the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, if the facts support such action.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Domestic Violence
