JUDGMENT :

1. This application is fled under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of proceedings bearing PWDVA No. 129/2021 under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “DV Act”).

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent has raised objection regarding the maintainability of the application on the ground that the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can not be invoked in the present case. It is his contention that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kamatchi vs. Laxmi Narayan, AIR 2022 SC 2932, has held that the proceeding under DV Act are civil in nature and hence application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure is excluded thereto. In support of his submissions, he placed reliance on other judgments, which are dealt with hereinafter.

3. At the outset, provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure need to be considered. It read thus :-

482 Saving of inherent powers of High Court : Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure confers inherent powers on High Court to pass orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or even otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Needless to record that Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked in the cases where the procedural law as contemplated by the Code of Criminal Procedure is made applicable.

4. Before considering the precedents cited supra, it would be relevant to look into the provisions of DV Act and Code of Criminal Procedure in order to ascertain as to whether there is legislative intent of exclusion of application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the proceedings under DV Act. In this regard, it would be relevant to take note of Section 28 of the DV Act, which reads thus :

28. Procedure :- (1) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, all proceedings under sections 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 and offence under section 31 shall be governed by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) shall prevent the Court from laying down its own procedure for disposal of an application under section 12 or under sub-section (2) of section 23.

It is pertinent to note that Section 28 of the DV Act provides that all proceedings under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 and offence under Section 31 of the DV Act shall be governed by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The legislative intent is, therefore, absolutely clear that all the proceedings under the aforesaid sections as well as offence under Section 31 of the DV Act are to be governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure. No doubt, sub-section (2) of Section 28 permits the Court to lay down its own procedure for disposal of an application under Section 12 or subsection (2) of Section 23. But this provision does not affect general application of provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure to DV Act. The intention of legislature to make applicable Code of Criminal Procedure for DV Act is crystal clear, irrespective civil nature of proceeding.

5. Wherever there is intention of the legislature to provide different forums for civil and criminal remedy under the same Act, appropriate provision is made to that effect. For example, in case of Copy Right Act, 1957, Chapter XII of the said Act provides for the civil remedies which lie before the Civil Court whereas Chapter XIII provides for offences of which the Magistrate is entitled to take cognizance thereof. Even in such case, there is no exclusion of application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

6. Perusal o