Domestic violence cases dragging on like other family court matters: Top court

With more than 4.7 lakh cases pending in the country under the Domestic Violence Act, the Supreme Court on Monday expressed concerns over the slow pace of progress in such cases and said a support system for women was not in place since the Act came into existence in 2005.
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (PWDV) Act was passed in 2005, with a mandate to ensure safe shelters and protection officers for women facing violence in their homes. The plea, filed by the NGO, ‘We The Women of India’, pointed out in 2021 that the “assistance system” framework was not in place nearly two decades later.
“There has to be an assistance network that needs to be set up- protection officers, health assistance, shelter homes etc. If a woman faces violence, where is she supposed to go?” senior advocate Shobha Gupta, appearing for the petitioner, argued.
Following this, a bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Pankaj Mithal issued a notice to all states and Union Territories (UTs) on a plea that sought court orders for the implementation of the support mechanism for battered women. The top court heard the issue after 18 months.
In February last year, the Supreme Court observed that the situation regarding the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act was “dismal”. The court passed directions for consultation between the Centre and states to ensure that the systems required to provide help and shelter to women facing domestic violence were put in place.
On Monday, the bench questioned why the system had not yet been put in place.
“We find the Domestic Violence Act is proceeding as if it is a maintenance case or any other case before the family court. This is for a quick remedy. Implementation of the Act must be seen. Why is there a delay?” the bench asked.
Gupta, in her arguments, analysed the affidavit filed by the Centre in the matter on April 20 last year, where it was noted that there were only 3,637 protection officers in the country, with 2,655 of them having “additional charge” of the Domestic Violence Act implementation. Only 710 dedicated protection officers have been appointed across India.
The protection officers under the Domestic Violence Act are expected to provide support to the victims, monitor the case and assist the court hearing the Domestic Violence Act case, act as an “interface” between the victims, police and the judicial process. The court in 2023 noted that as per the available data, if there is only one protection officer in each district, they would be faced with over 500 “intensive” cases.
“Most states have given additional charges to revenue officers or IAS officers. So far, it seems that none of the states are 100 per cent compliant,” Gupta said.
According to the policy, the number of protection officers in each district has to be fixed based on the number of cases and distress calls made by women.
However, the Centre’s affidavit shows that most states admitted that they do not have an adequate number of protection officers. The states have also given suggestions during the consultation with the Centre, regarding the necessary minimum qualifications required for protection officers. However, these states have failed to appoint dedicated protection officers, and have given additional charge of the work to already overburdened revenue officials.
The petitioners have also pointed out that empirical study of the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act provisions, the number of distress calls, and manpower required has not yet been conducted by the Women and Child Development Ministry, even though the Supreme Court had passed directions in February 2023 to the WCD Secretary to call a meeting with all states and UTs, as well as the Finance, Home and Social Justice Ministries, National Commission for Women, NHRC and NALSA to consider the issue.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati also informed the court that the work of setting up ‘One Stop Crisis Centres’ and other assistance was being done under ‘Mission Shakti’. The petitioners, however, argued that even that work has been slow.
According to the available data, only 733 One Stop Crisis Centres have been set up even though the Centre had sanctioned 801 such centres. Additionally, there is lack of awareness about the Domestic Violence Act and the assistance systems.
According to the Centre’s own affidavit, the complete list of One Stop Crisis Centres, protection officers, and their contact details are supposed to be displayed prominently on the websites of the WCD ministry, NCW, NHRC and the official websites of the state human rights bodies. However, the links giving these details are not prominently accessible on the home pages of these government bodies.
The common portal and dashboard of Mission Shakti, which is expected to display the details of the helplines, support centres and the data regarding distress calls is also a “work under process” with the data currently not available for analysis.
“Protection officers must be appointed by the states,” noted Justice Nagarathna. The bench, in its order, said, “Since the obligation for implementation rests not only with the government but also with states. We deem it necessary to issue notices to all states and Union Territories.”
The bench has now directed Gupta and the Additional Solicitor General to collate the information available and suggest the issues that can be dealt with by directions from the court. The matter will now be taken up on December 2, when the court is likely to issue detailed directions.