Litigants on both sides of a case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are often surprised by how the evidence stage actually unfolds. The case is heard by a Magistrate, summons issue as in a criminal matter, and yet no one is being prosecuted: the reliefs — protection, residence, monetary relief, custody, compensation — are civil in nature, and the facts are decided on the civil standard. This explainer sets out how evidence is led, tested and weighed in DV proceedings in Delhi's courts.
A civil case in a criminal courtroom
The DV Act deliberately routes its remedies through the Magistrate's court for speed and accessibility, while keeping the substance civil. Section 28(1) provides that proceedings under Sections 12, 18 to 23 and offences under Section 31 are governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure; Section 28(2) then permits the court to lay down its own procedure for disposal of an application under Section 12 or Section 23(2). Rule 6(5) of the DV Rules adds that Section 12 applications shall be dealt with in the manner of Section 125 CrPC proceedings — the summary maintenance procedure, not a criminal trial.
The practical consequence: there is no "charge", no "accused" in the strict sense, no presumption of innocence to be displaced beyond reasonable doubt. There are two parties, pleadings, evidence and a decision on probabilities.
The building blocks of the record
The application and reply
The Section 12 application (usually on the prescribed form, with a detailed narrative annexed) frames the allegations of physical, verbal, emotional, sexual or economic abuse. The respondent\'s reply joins issue paragraph-wise. Vague pleadings on either side surface painfully at the evidence stage.
The Domestic Incident Report
Where a Protection Officer has recorded a DIR, Section 12(1) proviso requires the Magistrate to consider it before passing orders. It is material the court takes into account, not conclusive proof of its contents.
Affidavits and documents
Courts direct affidavits of evidence with all documents relied upon: medical records, photographs, message exchanges, call records, rent agreements, salary slips and bank statements. Income affidavits in the format prescribed for maintenance litigation are routinely called for where monetary relief is claimed.
Cross-examination
Each deponent is offered for cross-examination. This is where exaggerated claims and false denials are tested — dates that do not tally, injuries without medical papers, pleaded penury against a visible lifestyle.
What each side is proving
The aggrieved person must establish, on probabilities, that she is a woman who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the respondent, that they share or shared a household or family relationship, and that the respondent\'s conduct meets the wide definition of domestic violence in Section 3 — which includes economic abuse such as deprivation of maintenance or dispossession from the shared household. For monetary relief under Section 20 she must also lay a factual foundation for the amounts: expenses, needs, and the respondent\'s means.
The respondent\'s evidence typically aims at three targets: negating the domestic relationship or shared household where that is genuinely in issue; demonstrating that specific incidents are false, embellished or explained; and presenting an honest picture of income and liabilities to resist inflated monetary claims. A respondent who conceals income invites adverse inference; one who documents it candidly is far better placed on quantum.
Interim orders and the final decision
Interim relief under Section 23 is granted on a prima facie view of the application, affidavit and DIR — often before any cross-examination. The final order under Sections 18 to 22 is different: it must rest on the evidence actually led. It is common for interim maintenance fixed at the outset to be recalibrated, upward or downward, once the parties\' true financial positions emerge from the record. An appeal against either lies to the Court of Session under Section 29 within thirty days.
Because the standard is probabilities and the procedure flexible, preparation wins DV cases: contemporaneous documents, precise dates, and clean income disclosure matter more than rhetoric. Both the aggrieved person and the respondent are entitled to a fair opportunity to test the other side\'s version — a DV case is decided on the record built, not the record assumed.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the standard of proof in a DV Act case?
The reliefs under Sections 18 to 22 of the DV Act are civil reliefs, and the aggrieved person must establish domestic violence on the balance of probabilities — that her version is more probable than not. Proof beyond reasonable doubt, the criminal standard, applies only if a prosecution under Section 31 for breach of a protection order is launched.
Is evidence in a DV case given by affidavit?
Largely, yes. Section 28(2) permits the court to lay down its own procedure, and in practice Delhi courts direct the parties to file affidavits of evidence with supporting documents, followed by cross-examination of the deponents. The Magistrate can also draw on the Domestic Incident Report prepared by the Protection Officer.
Can the respondent lead evidence too?
Certainly. After the aggrieved person's evidence is recorded and tested in cross-examination, the respondent files his own affidavit of evidence with documents — income records, communications, proof of separate residence, and the like — and is cross-examined in turn. Interim orders are frequently revisited in light of what the evidence stage reveals.
Do strict rules of evidence apply before the Magistrate?
The proceedings are governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure framework — now the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — but Section 28 read with Rule 6(5) of the DV Rules gives the court flexibility to adopt a summary, practical procedure. Courts therefore receive documents such as messages, photographs, medical papers and bank statements with less formality than a full trial, while still weighing their reliability.