That claims for restitution and compensation could be bundled-up with claims for protection orders and maintenance – without the significant expense of court fees that such claims would have carried if they were made under the ordinary civil law and not under the PWDVA – allowed us to prosecute a clutch of claims in a common petition. This meant a significant reduction of effort, time, and money, particularly important for underprivileged women for whom every meeting with the lawyer and every attendance in court counted in time and lost wages.
Especially for underprivileged women, access to the courts itself significantly alters the balance of power. Often, respondents in these cases are also underprivileged and do not have easy access to legal recourse. Where the dispute involves such parties, even notices from Mahila Panchayats can be the proverbial thumb on the balance in favour of the woman. Summons from Court can have an even more significant impact on that balance.
Asmita Basu: Has the law been useful in addressing violence by natal families?
Jawahar Raja: Yes, I have litigated cases under the Act against fathers and brothers.
“Unfortunately, Protection Officers have today been reduced to court factotums, mechanically filling-out forms to deposit them in the system”
Asmita Basu: Has the role of the Protection Officer created a bureaucratic hurdle in women’s access to justice?
Jawahar Raja: Not in my experience.
I do believe, however, that there is a need to re-imagine the office of the protection officer. Unfortunately, Protection Officers have today been reduced to court factotums, mechanically filling-out forms to deposit them in the system, while the statute imagines them as the first point of contact for women in distress, empowered to develop and deploy plans to prevent immediate violence.
In my years of interaction with the women activists from the Mahila Panchayats, I saw the significant support they were able to provide to women in distress. It seemed to me that they were able to provide this support because they were from the same community as the women they were helping, because they had similar experiences being survivors of domestic violence themselves, and because of their accumulated years of experience navigating a hostile system, first as victims, and then as activists. Protection officers, on the other hand, are educated and trained social workers but have little connection with the communities that the aggrieved women come from and lack both the specific skills and the experience of those activists. Perhaps as we mark twenty years of the PWDVA, we must examine if there are ways in which the Mahila Panchayat system, or other similar systems that are grounded in community participation, could support or supplement the office of the protection officer.
‘Staying Alive’: Celebrating 20 years of the DV Act | A Curator’s Note
Asmita Basu: A common complaint is that judicial delays have defeated the purpose of the PWDVA. What is your view? Is the PWDVA effective despite these delays?
Jawahar Raja: One has to just imagine how much worse the situation would be without the PWDVA and the answer to this question would be obvious. Judicial delays are endemic to our system, and they plague PWDVA cases just as they plague all others.
Asmita Basu: Have there been any changes in the use of Section 498A after the enactment of the PWDVA?
Jawahar Raja: In my experience, the use of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) has changed over time, but I am not sure that the PWDVA might have anything to do with it. Section 498A remains an important statutory recognition that certain kinds of marital cruelty must meet criminal sanction. And it continues to remain a pressure point in matrimonial disputes. The courts have had some say in alleviating what they see as misuse or abuse of Section 498A of which there is some anecdotal evidence. Although, I have not come across any evidence that Section 498A is either more or less ‘abused’ than any other provision of criminal law, such as Section 420 of the IPC (cheating), or Unlawful Activities (Prevention )Act, 1967, or Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. In any event, I am not sure that the PWDVA itself has in any significant way changed how we understand Section 498A or how we litigate it. This is, however, only an impression. I would imagine a question such as this would require carefully crafted socio-legal study and analysis.
“In any event, I am not sure that the PWDVA itself has in any significant way changed how we understand Section 498A or how we litigate it.”
Asmita Basu: What challenges and opportunities do you see in efforts to address domestic violence in the coming years?
Jawahar Raja: As noted earlier, I was not doing PWDVA cases between 2019 and 2025, and I have only recently resumed litigating these cases, so I may not be best placed to answer this question.
With that qualification, and speaking only as a lawyer, my sense is that we have not fully explored the potential of the Protection Officer under the PWDVA. We are going to have to find more creative ways of using the office of the Protection Officer, perhaps in conjunction with other institutions such as the Mahila Panchayats, if we are to prevent domestic violence.
In addition, we need a better inventory of service providers and shelter homes under the Act. Especially for women from underprivileged backgrounds, well appointed and functioning shelter homes can be the difference between safety and violence; in the worst cases they might even be the difference between life and death. An online search of the Delhi government website reveals that the Govt has notified homes as shelter homes under the PWDVA. My experience of trying to find a shelter home for an aggrieved person about 10 years ago was very poor. We were unable to find a home that would take the survivor in. I am not sure if the situation has improved, especially since all the shelter homes that are today mentioned on the Government’s website existed back in the day. Each of these were homes for destitute women, already established and operating under pre-existing statutes and schemes that had merely been additionally notified as shelter homes under the PWDVA.
The Indian domestic violence scenario is chilling