IMPORTANT POINT
The Domestic Violence Act do not exclude women altogether in a proceeding initiated under the Act.

JUDGMENT

A. Gopal Reddy, J.— A short question that arises for consideration in these two criminal petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is whether respondent, as defined under Section 2 (q) includes a female person or not under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short “the Act”).

2. When the petitions were taken up for healing by one of us (KCB, J), learned brother appears to have been felt that the matter should be decided by a Division Bench and accordingly directed the Registry to place the matter before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice for constitution of appropriate Bench for deciding the issue. Therefore, the petitions thus listed before us.

3. The facts in nutshell leading to filing of the petitions are thus:

Criminal petition No. 7160/2008 is filed by the petitioner for quashing the proceedings in DVC No.35/2008 on the file of VI-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, which was filed by the second respondent who is the daughter-in-law of the petitioner against her husband (1st respondent in DVC) and the petitioner herein claiming reliefs under Sections 18, 19 (a) & (b), 20(1)(d) and for compensation alleging domestic violence.

4. Criminal petition No. 8495/2008 is filed by the petitioners for quashing the proceedings in DVC No.7/2008 on the file of IV-Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, which was filed by the second respondent herein against her husband, the first petitioner herein and parents-in-law of the first respondent claiming reliefs under Sections 18, 19 and 20.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners in both the criminal petitions contended that the domestic violence case against the petitioners is not maintainable in view of the definition of respondent in Section 2(q) of the Act, but the same can be filed only against any adult male person but not against female persons. To buttress the said submission, reliance is placed on the judgment of this court in Smt. Menakuru Renuka and others v. Smt. Menakuru Mona Reddy and others1 and judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court n Ajay Kant v. Alka Sharma.2

6. In Smt. Menakuru Renuka (supra) this court after noticing the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Ajay Kant (supra) held that female members cannot be made as respondents in the proceedings under the Act.

7. In Ajay Kant (supra), the Madhya Pradesh High Court dealt with the notice issued by the Magistrate to the petitioners on an application filed under Section 12 of the Act. Learned single Judge after referring to the definition of respondent in Section 2(q) and Statement of Objects and Reasons for enacting the Act held that for obtaining any relief under the Act, an application can be initiated against only adult male person and on such application or under such proceeding, protection order can be passed, those orders will also be passed only against the adult male person and as provided under Section 31 of the Act, non-compliance of a protection order or an interim protection order has been made punishable and as such it can be said that the complaint for this offence can only be filed against such adult male person/respondent who has not complied with the protection order and it is clear that the application under Section 12 of the Act which has been filed by the respondent against petitioners No. 3 and 4 who are not adult male persons is not maintainable and accordingly quashed the proceedings against petitioners 3 and 4 therein.

8. When the above two judgments were brought to the notice of the learned brother, he was of the view that proviso to the definition ‘respondent’ has not properly been considered, once implied power is conferred on the Magistrate in disposing of the application under sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act, except orders under clause (b) of Section19 (1). If really the definition of ‘respondent’ means and includes only an adult male person, such proviso to Section 19 of the Act would not have been incorporated. Acc