Proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are designed to move quickly: Section 12 applications are to be disposed of within a target of sixty days, interim orders can issue on the first date, and Section 23(2) expressly permits ex parte orders on the aggrieved person's affidavit. The corollary is that a respondent who ignores notice does so at real cost — protection, residence, monetary and custody orders can all be passed in his absence. This explainer sets out how ex parte proceedings arise in Delhi's Mahila Courts, what orders follow, and the correctives available to a respondent who was never served or could not appear.
How a DV case reaches the ex parte stage
After a Section 12 application is filed, the Magistrate fixes a first date of hearing and issues notice, which Section 13 requires to be served — ordinarily through the Protection Officer — within two days or such further reasonable time as the court allows. From there, three situations produce ex parte proceedings: the respondent is served and does not appear; the respondent appears once and then absents himself; or the court is satisfied that the respondent is evading service and effects substituted service. In each, the Magistrate records the satisfaction of service in the order sheet and proceeds to hear the aggrieved person alone.
What can be ordered in the respondent's absence
| Provision | Relief | Ex parte availability |
|---|---|---|
| Section 18 | Protection order restraining acts of domestic violence, contact, alienation of assets | Interim and final, on affidavit |
| Section 19 | Residence order — right to reside, restraint on dispossession, alternative accommodation | Interim and final |
| Section 20 | Monetary relief — maintenance, medical expenses, loss of earnings | Interim and final; arrears accrue from the order |
| Section 21 | Temporary custody of children | Interim, typically pending appearance |
| Section 22 | Compensation for injuries including mental torture and emotional distress | Ordinarily after full hearing |
Section 23(2) is the operative engine: where the Magistrate is satisfied that the application discloses that the respondent is committing, has committed, or is likely to commit an act of domestic violence, an ex parte order under any of Sections 18 to 22 may be passed on the basis of the aggrieved person's affidavit in the prescribed form.
The respondent's correctives, in the right order
1. Obtain the record
Certified copies of the application, affidavit, order sheets and service report. Every later step depends on what the record shows about service.
2. Comply in the interim
Protection and residence orders operate immediately; breach is an offence under Section 31. Compliance pending challenge preserves credibility and liberty.
3. Choose the forum
Defective service or genuine inability: recall application before the Magistrate, supported by proof. Valid service but adverse order: appeal under Section 29 within thirty days to the Court of Session. Changed circumstances after a final order: Section 25(2) application.
4. File the reply and affidavit of income
Once appearance is restored, the substantive defence — reply to the Section 12 application and the income affidavit for monetary relief — must be filed promptly; courts in Delhi treat delay after restoration unsympathetically.
Strategic notes for both sides
For the aggrieved person, the discipline is documentation: a complete affidavit under Section 23(2), the domestic incident report where one exists, and meticulous proof of service — because a final order built on doubtful service invites recall and restarts the clock. For respondents, the worst position is the self-inflicted one: ignoring notice in the belief that a "civil" matrimonial case can wait. Monetary relief accrues month by month, interim orders harden into final ones, and an appeal filed months later must first explain the silence. A served respondent who appears, contests the affidavit and files his income disclosure is in a far stronger position than one who returns to challenge a fait accompli.
The chamber of Advocate Manish Jha advises and appears in domestic violence, maintenance and connected matrimonial proceedings before the Mahila Courts, Family Courts and the High Court of Delhi. This article is for general information; it is not legal advice and does not create an advocate-client relationship.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a Magistrate really decide a DV case without hearing the respondent?
Yes. Section 23(2) permits ex parte interim orders on the basis of the aggrieved person's affidavit, and if the respondent stays away after service, the Magistrate can proceed to hear the application and pass final orders under Sections 18 to 22. The proceedings are civil in nature even though conducted before a criminal court, and absence is treated much as it is in a civil suit.
What can a respondent do against an ex parte order?
Three routes exist: an application before the same Magistrate explaining the non-appearance and seeking recall where service was defective or absence was beyond his control; an appeal under Section 29 to the Court of Session within thirty days; and, where the order is interim, participation in the main proceeding with a prayer under Section 25(2) for alteration or revocation on changed circumstances. The right route depends on whether service was valid and what stage the case has reached.
Does an ex parte protection or residence order bind immediately?
Yes. Orders under the Act operate from pronouncement and are enforceable through the protection officer and the police; breach of a protection order is itself an offence under Section 31. A respondent who learns of an ex parte order should comply first and challenge second — violation pending challenge converts a civil setback into criminal exposure.
How does the aggrieved person prove service?
Through the mechanisms in Section 13: service by the Protection Officer or as directed by the court, with a declaration of service. In Delhi practice, courts also permit service by speed post and, increasingly, by electronic means recorded in the order sheet. A respondent challenging an ex parte order on the ground of non-service must confront the service record, so obtaining the certified order sheets is always the first step.