Section 31 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
🔹 Section 31 – Breach of Protection Order
Bare Text (in simple words):
If the respondent (husband or his relative) breaches a Protection Order (or interim protection order) given under the Act, it amounts to an offence.
🔹 Key Provisions of Section 31
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Offence | Breach of protection order (e.g., violating residence order, monetary relief, custody order, etc.) |
| Punishment | Imprisonment up to 1 year, or fine up to ₹20,000, or both |
| Nature of Offence | Cognizable & Non-bailable |
| Who can take cognizance? | Magistrate, on a complaint by the aggrieved woman, Protection Officer, or any person on her behalf |
| Trial | Offence is triable by Magistrate |
| Additional Power | As per Section 31(3) – The court may frame charges under Section 498A IPC (cruelty by husband/relatives) along with Section 31, if facts disclose such offence |
🔹 Purpose of Section 31
Ensures enforcement of protection orders (since PWDVA is primarily civil in nature, but this section gives it a criminal backing).
Creates deterrence by making violation a punishable crime.
Provides speedy remedy as Magistrate can directly take cognizance.
🔹 Important Case Laws on Section 31 PWDVA
1. V.D. Bhanot v. Savita Bhanot (2012) 3 SCC 183
Supreme Court held that PWDVA applies even to acts of violence committed prior to the Act.
Breach of orders under Section 31 is punishable irrespective of when the violence occurred.
2. Kunapareddy v. Kunapareddy Swarna Kumari (2016) 11 SCC 774
SC held that complaint under Section 31 is maintainable even if filed after some delay.
The court emphasized the protective nature of the Act and upheld strict enforcement.
3. Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora (2016) 10 SCC 165
SC struck down the term “adult male” from PWDVA.
Now, any relative (male or female) can be a respondent under PWDVA → breach by them also attracts Section 31 punishment.
4. S. Prabhakaran v. State of Kerala (2010 Cri LJ 2116, Ker HC)
Kerala HC clarified that breach of protection order is a distinct offence under Section 31,
and proceedings under IPC (like 498A) can also run simultaneously.
5. Shambhu Prasad Singh v. Manjari (2013 Cri LJ 3524, Patna HC)
Court held that the Magistrate has the power to punish the respondent if he violates custody or residence orders passed under PWDVA.
🔹 Example Scenarios of Section 31
Husband enters wife’s shared household despite a residence order barring him.
Husband stops paying maintenance/monetary relief ordered by court.
Relatives of husband harass woman despite a protection order.
👉 In all these cases, Section 31 can be invoked.
🔹 Summary Table
| Section | Offence | Punishment | Nature | Trial |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31 PWDVA | Breach of protection order (interim/final) | Imprisonment up to 1 year, or fine up to ₹20,000, or both | Cognizable & Non-bailable | By Magistrate |
✅ Conclusion:
Section 31 of PWDVA gives teeth to the Act by making breach of protection orders a criminal offence. It ensures that respondents comply with court directions, and women are provided real-time protection. Courts have consistently upheld its strict application to safeguard women’s rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments