(1) The Union Parliament has plenary power of legislation within the field of legislation committed to it, and subject to certain constitutional restrictions, it can legislate an Act to operate prospectively as well as retrospectively. It is, however, a cardinal principle of construction that every statute is prima facie prospective, unless it is expressly or by necessary implication, made to have retrospective operation.

(2) The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Act 43 of 2005) (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Domestic Violence Act, 2005') was enacted keeping in view the rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India to provide for a remedy under the civil law which is intended to protect the woman from being victims of domestic violence and to prevent the occurrence of domestic violence in the society. The World Conference of Human Rights held in Vienna in 1993 and the declaration on elimination of violence against women in the same year, concluded that civil society and the Governments have acknowledged that violence against women is a public health and human rights concern. Therefore, to provide for more effective protection of rights of women, who are victims of violence of any kind occurring within the family, guaranteed under the Constitution, and for the matters concerned thereto or incidental thereto, the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 has been passed. In exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (3) to Section 1 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Central Government appointed 26th day of October, 2006 as the date on which the provisions of the said Act came into force. Every modern legislation is initiated with some goals and objectives and speaking broadly has some beneficial purpose and reason. Whether the legislation made by the Parliament is 'prospective' or 'retrospective' in operation, is the question to be decided in these two Criminal Petitions.

For sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed in the respective D.V.Cs.

(3) Criminal Petition No.346 of 2009 is filed to quash all further proceedings in D.V.C. No.163 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial, whereas, Criminal Petition No.7978 of 2009 is filed to quash the proceedings in D.V.C. No. 10 of 2009 on the file of the I Additional Munsif Magistrate, Tenali, Guntur district.

(4) SHORN of unnecessary details, the brief facts that are necessary for disposal of Criminal Petition No.346 of 2009 may be stated as follows: Petitioner no.1 married the first respondent on 29.12.2003, which was registered at Nagpur, and again the marriage ceremony was performed on 28.1.2004 at Hyderabad, and thereafter she was taken to Australia by the respondent no.1 on 20.2.2004 and they lived together in Australia for about two months and thereafter she returned to India. Once again, she went back to Australia in September, 2004 and stayed with the respondent no.1 till May, 2005 and later she came back to India along with her husband by which time she was pregnant. Again, on 22.6.2005, the couple went to Australia and a baby was born to the petitioner no.1 on 29.06.2005. The allegation against the respondents is that from the beginning of the marriage life, the petitioner no.1 was ill-treated and insulted by the respondents, demanding to bring more money from her parents and in Australia also, both the respondents gave physical and mental torture to her and therefore the petitioner no.1 and her child left the house and approached Australian police. Thereafter, the petitioners filed a petition on 16.12.2008 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 to grant certain reliefs as mentioned therein, which was taken on file as D.V.C. NO.163 of 2008.

Similarly, the brief facts that are necessary for disposal of Criminal Petition No.7978 of 2009 may be stated as follows: Pet