This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. to quash proceedings in D.V.C.No.12 of 2010 (DVC) on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tenali, Guntur District.

2. The petitioner herein is the respondent and the respondents herein are the petitioners in the DVC. For the sake of convenience, I refer the parties as arrayed in the DVC.

3. The complaint was filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short ‘the Act’), for granting the following reliefs under Sections 19, 20 and 22 of the Act:

“1. Residence order i.e., alternate accommodation/rent of the same level at Rs.1,000/-per month in terms of 19(F) of the Act;

2. Maintenance of Rs.4,000/-per month to each petitioner in total Rs.8,000/-per month under Section 20(b) &(c) of the Act; and

3. Compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-under Section 22 of the Act.”

4. It is necessary to briefly note the facts of the case in this context, they are as follows:

The petitioners are the wife and son of the respondent. The first petitioner married the respondent on 29-08-1989. At that time the parents of the first petitioner gave a sum of Rs.70,000/-towards Pasupukumkuma which was entrusted in fact to the respondent for the benefit of the family in the presence of elders apart from giving gold ornaments and household articles worth Rs.40,000/-. It is claimed that the marriage was immediately consummated whereas during the course of marital life they begot the second petitioner. It is alleged that thereafter the respondent subjected the first petitioner to mental and physical harassment for bringing amounts from her parents towards dowry. It is also alleged that the respondent developed illegal contacts with one Estheru Rani following which he threatened the first petitioner to give divorce. It is further alleged that the respondent having developed aversion towards the first petitioner made several attempts to get rid of her whereas on one occasion in that context he tried to tie her neck with a rope, but fortunately she escaped from him. It is further alleged that on 30-03-2007 the respondent in a drunken state beat the first petitioner for selling her parents land and paying the corresponding sale proceeds to him threatening that unless the demand was met with, he would give divorce to her following which she gave a report to the SHO, Taluka Police Station, for necessary action. It is further alleged that ultimately he deserted her. Further it is claimed that the respondent being a railway employee gets a salary of Rs.202,000/-per month whereas the first petitioner is not having any means to maintain herself and the child by reason of which she is to be provided with necessary monetary relief and compensation under Section 20 and 22 of the Act apart from providing accommodation under Section 19 of the Act.

5. It is represented on behalf of the respondent that the respondent filed D.O.P.No.230 of 2009 on the file of the Court of District Judge, Guntur for granting a decree of divorce dissolving their marriage under Section 10(1)(i)(ix)(x) of Divorce Act, 1869 which was allowed on 12-08-2010 on contest by reason of which the complaint is not tenable. It is admitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the decree of divorce granted in the said O.P. became final.

6. Therefore, it is to be seen as to whether the DVC is maintainable in view of the grant of divorce in favour of the respondent against the first petitioner or for any other reasons.

7. Here the relevant provisions of the Act are to be taken into consideration.

8. Section 2(a) of the Act contemplates that “aggrieved person” 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 to domestic violence by the respondent. Therefore, there should be domestic relationship between the aggrieved person and the respondent apart from the question of subjecting the