Domestic violence proceedings are predominantly civil, and inherent criminal revisional power remains available in appropriate cases.

Proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are predominantly civil because the Act creates rights to protection, residence, monetary relief, custody and compensation, and Section 26 allows those remedies to be pursued in civil, family or criminal proceedings; only breach of protection orders and failure of a protection officer's duty under Sections 31 and 33 take on a criminal character. Section 28 makes the Code of Criminal Procedure applicable to proceedings under the Act, and that express application does not exclude the High Court's inherent power under Section 482. The High Court can therefore exercise Section 482 in appropriate cases, subject to ordinary restraints and alternative remedies.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are criminal proceedings or predominantly civil in nature; (ii) Whether the High Court can exercise power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Issue (i): Whether proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are criminal proceedings or predominantly civil in nature.

Analysis: The scheme of the Act, the nature of the rights created, and the reliefs provided show that the Act is designed to afford civil remedies for protection, residence, monetary relief, custody and compensation. Proceedings may be initiated before a Magistrate, but the tribunal chosen does not control the character of the proceeding. The Act also permits the same reliefs to be sought in civil, family and criminal proceedings under Section 26, which reinforces that the core right enforced is civil in nature. The penal provisions and the general application of the Code of Criminal Procedure are intended to make the civil remedies speedy and effective, not to convert the entire proceeding into a criminal prosecution.

Conclusion: The proceedings are predominantly civil in nature, and only proceedings for breach of protection orders and failure of the protection officer's duty under Sections 31 and 33 assume criminal character.

Issue (ii): Whether the High Court can exercise power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Analysis: Section 28 expressly applies the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to proceedings under Sections 12 to 23 and to offences under Section 31, subject to the Act and the limited power of the court to regulate its own procedure in a particular case. The language of Section 28 is plain and unambiguous. The availability of an appeal under Section 29 and the power to lay down procedure under Section 28(2) do not exclude the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court. The power under Section 482 remains available, subject to ordinary self-imposed restraints and alternate statutory remedies.

Conclusion: The High Court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in appropriate proceedings under the Act.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by holding that proceedings under the Act are generally civil in nature but governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the High Court's inherent jurisdiction remains available in appropriate cases.

Ratio Decidendi: The character of proceedings under the Act is determined by the nature of the rights and remedies created, while the express statutory application of criminal procedure preserves the High Court's inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

---