Patna High Court Reiterates: Application Under Section 12 DV Act Not A Complaint, No Need For Magistrate To Take Cognizance

The Patna High Court has reiterated that an Application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act is a not a Complaint within the meaning of Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code and therefore a Magistrate need not take cognizance of it.

The Court was considering a Revision Petition filed by Husband and In-Laws challenging the cognizance taken by the Magistrate on the Wife's Application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act, 2005.

The Bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri observed, "...an application under the D.V. Act, 2005 is not a complaint within the meaning of Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. or 223 of the BNSS. Therefore, there is no need to take cognizance upon an application under the D.V. Act, 2005. The learned Magistrate on receipt of the application shall only fix a date for hearing within three days from the date of filing of the application under Section 12(4) of the said Act...."

The Petitioners were represented by Advocate Dr. Anjani Pd. Singh and the Respondents were represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Renu Kumari.

Facts of the Case

The Petitioners were the husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the opposite party no.2 (wife and daughter-in-law) in a domestic violence case filed by the latter under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The Magistrate took cognizance upon the Application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act, 2005.

The Appeal filed against the Magistrate's action by the Petitioners was dismissed by way of the impugned order.

Reasoning By Court

The Court at the outset noted that the only question involved in the Revision Petition is that as to whether an Application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act is a complaint within the meaning of Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. and whether the order of cognizance is bad in law or not.

Referring to the recent Supreme Court decision in Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi vs. Vidhi Rawal (2025 INSC 734), the Court reiterated that an application under the D.V. Act, 2005 is not a complaint within the meaning of Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. or 223 of the BNSS.

".....this Court finds that the order of cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate as well as the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the appeal against the order of cognizance is bad in law. Both the Courts below did not consider the provision under Sections 12 and 13 of the D.V. Act, 2005......" the Court observed.

It thus directed the Magistrate to issue Notice upon the Present Petitioners for hearing of the application under Section 12 of the said Act.

The Petition was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: Prashat Kumar vs. The State of Bihar

Click here to read/ download Order