Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

.

5. Now as per Section 7, a Family Court, subject to other provisions of the Act, shall have and exercise also as jurisdiction exercisable by the Magistrate of the first class under Chapter IX (relating to order for maintenance of wife children and parents of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) and such other jurisdiction as may be conferred on it by any other statute. The distinction between the two jurisdictions, one mentioned in Section 7(1) and the other in sub- section (2) of Section 7, is thus clear from the scheme of the Act itself. Now the question is as to what is the procedure to be applied to these two jurisdictions and the proceedings arising therefrom, especially in the context of the transfer of proceedings under Sections 125 and 127, Cr. P.C. 1973 pending before the Family Court i.e. whether an application under Section 24, CPC will apply or an application under Section 407, Cr. P.C. will apply or for that matter, any other remedy would be available in this regard. In this context when the Court peruses Section 10, which describes the procedure generally to be followed by the Family Court, it is revealed that Sub-section 1 thereof, which is subject to other provisions of the Act and the Rules, says that the provisions of the CPC, 1908 and of any other law for time being in force shall apply to the suits and proceedings (other than the proceedings under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), before a Family Court, and for the purposes of application of the CPC, a Family Court shall be deemed to be a Civil Court and shall have all the powers of such Court. Now the said provision itself makes it very clear that the CPC applies to suits and proceedings other than the proceedings under Chapter IX of the Cr. P.C. Thus Cr. P.C. is excluded from application to suits and proceedings referred to in Section 10(1) which is obviously a .

reference to the suits and proceedings mentioned in Section 7(1) read with clause (a) to (g) of the explanation to it. The provision itself excludes the application of CPC to proceedings under Chapter IX Cr. P.C.

6. Sub-section (2) of Section 10, which is again subject to the other provisions of the Act and the Rules, says that the provisions of the Cr. P.C. or the rules made thereunder, shall apply to the proceedings under Chapter IX Cr. P.C. before a Family Court. Thus Cr. P.C. applies to proceedings under Chapter IX. It being so, a logical corollary of it is that, for the transfer of any proceedings under Sections 125 and 127, Cr. P.C. which fall under Chapter DC Cr. P.C. the Cr. P.C. applies. Section 407, Cr. P.C. contains a provision which empowers the High Court to transfer any particular case from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction. The High Court may act either on the report of the lower Court or the application of the party interested or its initiative. In the instant case a transfer is being sought from the Family Court, Faizabad to the Court of Principle Judge Family Court, Ambedkar Nagar is outside the sessions division hence an application will lie before the High Court.

subsection (2) of Section 10, as already discussed, and for the reasons already given it is Cr. P.C. which applies and it contains a provision for the transfer of such proceedings under Section 407 thereof.

11. In the aforesaid case of Nadeem there was a specific remedy against the orders of the Family Court by way of an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Act, 1984, therefore, the provisions of the CPC and the Cr. P.C. was held to be inapplicable but the said reasoning does not r apply in this case in view of the unambiguous provision of the Act, 1984 itself in this regard as noted hereinabove, which permits the applicability of Cr. P.C. to proceedings under Chapter IX, Cr. P.C. This is also the view taken by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the Case of Durga Prasad v. Family Judge, Bareilly, (1998) 33 ALR 536: 1998 AIHC 3902 (All). In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is not necessary to go into the question as to whether the remedy will lie under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as suggested by some of the learned Counsels, as this would be the case only if there was no remedy available in the Cr. P.C.

under Sections 22 to 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to transfer cases relating to matters dealt with by explanation of sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act. Likewise, it has powers under Section 407 of the Code to transfer a case relating to Chapter IX of the Code.

Therefore, we answer the reference that since the powers of Judicial Magistrate First Class have been exercised by the Family Court for deciding applications under Section 125 of the Code, the revision filed against the said order should be registered as Criminal Revision. Therefore, with respect to the judgment in the case of Aruna Choudhary, (supra) we hold that correct law has not been laid down in this judgment. Revisions arising out of applications under Section 125 of the Code shall be registered as Criminal Revisions as they flow from the proceedings under the Code. However, it is for the High Court to frame rules for hearing appeals and revisions arising out of the orders passed by the Family Court and its registration. The High Court may consider this matter on the administrative side.