Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

~~~~~~~~~~~

1.Whether the Family Court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of an independent and original proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'PWDV Act' for short) and grant any of the reliefs under section 18 to 12 of the Act? This is the moot question raised by the petitioner in this case.

2.The petitioner herein is the respondent in M.C. No. 367 of 2015 on the file of the Family Court, Ernakulam. The aforesaid petition has been filed by the respondent herein under Section 12 of the PWDV Act seeking a residence order and monetary reliefs. The maintainability of the original application itself is under challenge in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

4.I have heard Sri. S.Rajeev, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. S.Sreekumar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the learned Family Court was having no jurisdiction to entertain an independent application claiming relief under PWDV Act. It is argued by the learned Counsel that by virtue of Section 12 of the PWDV Act, the aggrieved person has to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate for obtaining orders of reliefs. By Section 26 of the PWDV Act, if any legal proceeding is pending before a Civil Court, a Family Court or a Criminal Court, the reliefs available under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 can also be sought in addition to and along with any other relief that the aggrieved person may seek in such suit or legal proceeding even if such proceeding was initiated before or after the commencement of the PWDV Act. But no independent application can be maintained before the Courts enumerated in Section 26 of the PWDV Act, is the submission. According to the learned counsel, the proceedings before the Family Court is clearly an abuse of process and the same is liable to be quashed. The learned Counsel would rely on the decision of a Division Bench of the Chattisgarh High Court in Smt.Neetu Singh V Sunil Singh [AIR 2008 (Chattisgarh) 1] and that of the Orissa High Court in Smt.Kumari Behara V State of Orissa and others [AIR 2010 Orissa 68] to canvass the legal proposition advanced.

7. I have considered the rival submissions.

8.The object of the PWDV Act is to provide for more effective protection of the rights of women guaranteed under the Constitution who are victims of violence of any kind occurring within the family and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Section 3 of the PWDV Act defines 'domestic violence'. The definition of 'domestic violence' is very wide and apart from other aspects it encompasses within itself physical abuse, verbal abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse and economic abuse. Section 12 forming part of Chapter IV of the said PWDV Act provides for an application being made by an aggrieved person or a protection officer or any other person on behalf of aggrieved person. The application is maintainable before a Judicial Magistrate of First Class or a Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be. 'Aggrieved person' as defined by Clause (a) of Section 2 means any woman who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent. Sub- section (3) of Section 12 provides that every application under sub-section (1) shall be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed. Section 12 of the PWDV Act provides that an aggrieved person or a protection officer or any other person for and on behalf of the aggrieved person may present an application to the Magistrate seeking one or more relief under the PWDV Act.

12.Section 26 of the PWDV Act has been inserted with an objective that in addition to the provisions of Section 12, the aggrieved person is entitled to any relief available under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 in any legal proceeding, before a Civil Court, Family Court or a Criminal Court, affecting the aggrieved person and the respondent whether such proceeding was initiated before or after the commencement of the PWDV Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 26 further envisages that any relief referred to in Sub-section (1) may be sought for in addition to and along with any other relief that the aggrieved person may seek in such suit or legal proceeding before a civil or criminal Court. Sub-section (3) obliges the aggrieved person to disclose the nature of the reliefs, if any, obtained in any proceeding other than a proceeding under the Act. The intention of the legislature was to enable the aggrieved person to secure the same relief in other proceedings before the Civil, Family or Criminal Court, whether it was instituted prior to or after the commencement of the PWDV Act. This would enure to the convenience of the aggrieved person as well as the respondent and would also prevent multiplicity or proceedings and conflict of orders. However an application under Section 12 seeking various reliefs under Section 18 to 22 cannot be filed as an original or independent application before the Family Court as the Act expressly stipulates that a proceeding under Section 12 of the PWDV Act has to be filed before the Magistrate competent to entertain the application. The Family Court will have jurisdiction under the PWDV Act to grant relief to the victim of domestic violence only if there is an existing legal proceeding and the application under Section 26 of the Act seeking relief under section 18 to 22 is filed in that proceeding. The same view has been taken in Neetu Singh (supra) and Kumari Behara (supra). Accordingly, I hold that the Family Court, Ernakulam is having no jurisdiction to entertain M.C. No.367 of 2015 on the files of the said court. The same is quashed. However, the respondent will be at liberty to approach the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction under Section 12 of the PWDV Act or alternatively, before the competent court under Section 26(1) of the PWDV Act, where any legal proceeding affecting the parties are pending. The petition is disposed of as above.