The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction aims to prevent the abduction of children by their parents by ensuring the child's prompt return to his/her place of habitual residence. At the time of drafting the Convention, the drafters believed that non-custodial parents who were fathers perpetrated most of the abductions. However, the current statistics reveal the overwhelming majority of all abductors as primary or joint-primary caretakers. Unfortunately, it is unknown what exact proportion of these situations includes abductions triggered by domestic violence. In the absence of an explicit provision of domestic violence against spouses as a defence against an order of return, for a parent who has abducted a child to escape domestic violence, the relevant defence is of “grave risk of harm” to and “intolerable situation” for the child under Article 13(1)(b) of the Convention. However, the lack of guidance on what constitutes “grave risk” and “intolerable situation”, at least in the past, and its operationalisation in the context of domestic violence brings in pervasive indeterminacy in child abduction. In 2012, the Hague Conference on Private International Law identified “domestic violence allegations and return proceedings” as a key issue and recommended steps for developing principles on the management of domestic violence allegations in return proceedings leading to the adoption of a Good Practice Guide on this issue in 2020.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development (WCD) and the Ministry of Law and Justice, India, cite that most Indian parents who abduct their children happen to be women escaping domestic violence abroad. Thus, they are victims escaping for themselves and their children's safety. This research has summed up the judgments delivered by High Courts and the Supreme Court of India on child abduction between 1984 and 2019. Through judicial mapping, the paper discusses the cases in which battered women have highlighted and argued domestic violence as a reason against their children's return. The paper evaluates whether the reason given by the two ministries against India's accession to the Hague Convention is reflected in cases that have come up for judicial resolution and what are the criteria evolved by the judiciary in addressing the concerns of domestic violence against a spouse involved in child abduction. The paper analyses India's legislative initiative, the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Bill, 2016 and assesses the measures proposed by the Bill for considering domestic violence against a spouse in abduction cases.

《海牙国际诱拐儿童民事方面的海牙公约》旨在通过确保儿童迅速返回其惯常居住地来防止其父母对儿童的绑架。在起草《公约》时，起草者认为，父亲的非监护父母是大多数绑架行为的实施者。但是，目前的统计数字显示，绝大多数绑架者是初级或联合初级监护人。不幸的是，目前尚不清楚这些情况的确切比例包括由家庭暴力引发的绑架。在没有明确规定针对配偶的家庭暴力作为对返回令的辩护的情况下，对于绑架了孩子以逃避家庭暴力的父母而言，根据《公约》第十三条第（1）款（b）项，有关辩护对儿童具有“严重伤害危险”和“无法忍受的境地”。但是，至少在过去，对于什么构成“严重风险”和“无法忍受的境况”缺乏指导，以及在家庭暴力背景下对其的操作导致绑架儿童的普遍不确定性。2012年，海牙国际私法会议将“家庭暴力指控和返还程序”确定为关键问题，并建议了步骤，以制定有关返还程序中家庭暴力指控管理的原则，从而通过了《良好做法指南》。 2020年发行。至少在过去，在家庭暴力的背景下实施这一措施，普遍导致了绑架儿童的不确定性。2012年，海牙国际私法会议将“家庭暴力指控和返还程序”确定为关键问题，并建议了步骤，以制定有关返还程序中家庭暴力指控管理的原则，从而通过了《良好做法指南》。 2020年发行。至少在过去，在家庭暴力的背景下实施这一措施，普遍导致了绑架儿童的不确定性。2012年，海牙国际私法会议将“家庭暴力指控和返还程序”确定为关键问题，并建议了步骤，以制定有关返还程序中家庭暴力指控管理的原则，从而通过了《良好做法指南》。 2020年发行。

印度妇女与儿童发展部（WCD）和印度法律与司法部援引大多数绑架其子女的印度父母都是逃避国外家庭暴力的妇女。因此，他们是为自己和孩子的安全逃脱的受害者。这项研究总结了高等法院和印度最高法院在1984年至2019年之间就绑架儿童问题做出的判决。通过司法制图，本文讨论了受虐妇女强调并辩称家庭暴力是其不利于子女的原因的案例。返回。本文评估了两个部委针对印度的理由是否 《海牙公约》的加入反映在已经提起司法解决的案件中，以及司法机构在处理针对绑架儿童的配偶的家庭暴力问题时所发展的标准是什么。该文件分析了印度的立法举措，即《 2016年国际儿童绑架的民事方面的法案》，并评估了该法案提出的措施，以考虑在绑架案件中针对配偶的家庭暴力。