Ground Reality Falls Short in Protecting Women from Domestic Violence: A Closer Look at the Challenges in Implementing the PWDVA
In a recent hearing by the Supreme Court justices B.V. Nagarathna and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, concerning the implementation of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA), a gap between government assertions and the actual effectiveness of these measures has been glaringly evident. Despite assurances given by the Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati that the infrastructure under ‘Mission Shakti’ was fully operational, practical experiences from the ground paint a significantly different picture.
Our team at the frontline has observed these discrepancies firsthand in three domestic violence complaints managed over the last year. Even after the court’s directives, Protection Officers failed to submit requisite reports within the three-month deadline in all cases. In one instance, a report intended for a particular court was erroneously submitted to another, highlighting systemic disorganization and the perils of overburdening officers.
This situation is exacerbated in districts where only one Protection Officer is appointed to handle the entire region. The duties of these officers are not just administrative but intensely proactive; they are required to conduct on-the-spot surveys, detailed assessments, and ensure the ongoing safety of complainants. These are not tasks that can be rushed or handled superficially without compromising the safety and justice owed to victims.
The figures are stark—about 471,684 cases were still pending as of July 1, 2022, with 21,008 appeals and revision petitions unresolved. The court’s analysis described the situation as “dismal”, observing that many states had appointed insufficient numbers of Protection Officers. Some regions had inappropriately tasked existing officers with additional responsibilities, while others had only one officer per district—a clearly inadequate arrangement given the volume of cases, with some officers overseeing more than 500 cases each.
The Supreme Court’s response has been to mandate a comprehensive reassessment of the PWDVA’s implementation framework. Directives issued on February 24, 2023, include high-level meetings led by the Secretary of the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD), aimed at addressing these inadequacies. The agenda is to review the workload and distribution of Protection Officers across districts and ensure that the staffing and operational protocols of One Stop Centres are adequate.
However, for the victims of domestic violence, these measures are yet to translate into tangible improvements. The delays and administrative hurdles reflect a systemic issue that requires more than just policy adjustments—it needs a proactive, resource-backed approach to safeguard the rights and safety of women across the country.
The court observed: “The nature of responsibilities which each Protection Officer is required to discharge are intensive and not of the kind expected of judicial officers. Protection Officers are required by law to conduct on the spot surveys, inspections, assist the courts by acting as the interface between the victims, police and the judicial process. Their reports, especially for emergency orders are crucial. In these circumstances, it would be necessary that the Union of India takes an intensive look into these aspects.”
Pursuant to this, on February 24, 2023, the court passed certain directions listed below:
1. The Secretary of the Union Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) to convene a meeting with the Principal Secretaries of all States and Union Territories to look into the inadequacy of Protection Officers under the PWDVA. The meeting shall be attended by the Union Finance Secretary, Secretary National Commission for Women, the nominee of the Chairperson National Human Rights Commission, Secretary Union Ministry of Home Affairs, Secretary Social Justice and Empowerment and a nominee of the Chairperson of the NALSA.
2. The meeting shall be in regards to finding how many cases have been assigned to each Protection Officers, how many courts are required to be looked after each Protection Officers, current strength of Protection Officers in each districts and whether that is adequate to meet needs in that specific area. It sought suggest on requisite guidelines for assessing strength of Protection Officers and directed conducting an empirical study and collate information gathered from States on their experience of implementing PWDVA.
3. The MWCD to place on record the current status of the implementation of Mission Shakti. Specify information on number of One-stop Centres proposed in each districts, number of One Stop Centre made functional, place where the One Stop will be situated, staffing pattern, requisite manpower and nature of workload, whether hospitals/police station and local bodies are required to mention contact details of One Stop Centres etc.
4. The Union shall indicate the provisions under the PWDVA in relation to Mission Shakti and how it shall act as an umbrella scheme for the implementation of PWDVA.
As legal practitioners and advocates for gender justice, it’s imperative that we continue to monitor these developments closely and push for a system where the promises of protection and empowerment are not just theoretical but a reliable reality. This involves not only critiquing the shortcomings but also actively participating in the dialogue and implementation processes that aim to rectify these gaps. The fight against domestic violence is complex and multifaceted, and it demands a robust, responsive system that can adapt to the needs of those it intends to protect.