B.D. Agarwal, J.

1. The proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Briefly, 'PWDV Act'), pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi, Assam in MR Case No. 34 of 2008 is under challenge in this criminal petition. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Proceeding, 1973, read with Section 20(1) of the Constitution of India has been filed by the husband praying for quashing the aforesaid criminal proceeding against him.

2. Heard the arguments of Dr. B. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and that of Mr. MH Rajbarbhuiyan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. l/complainant. The State was represented by Mr. K. Munir, learned Additional P.P. for the State.

3. Whether the PWDV Actis retrospective or prospective and whether, the criminal proceeding is hit by Article 20(1) of the Constitution is the moot question for consideration before this court. In my view, before answering the question it would be just and appropriate to have an insight view of the facts of the case, which are briefly narrated below:

3.1. The marriage between the parties took place in the year 1996. The couple were blessed with a female child on 28.6.1998, who is presently in the custody of her mother. It was followed by giving birth of two stillborn children successively in the year 2000 and 2006. Thereafter, the matrimonial relation between the parties became strained and the complainant left her matrimonial home in the month of May, 2006 and returned to her parents' house.

3.2 It is the further case of the complainant that after few days, she was taken back by her husband in the matrimonial home at Karimganj. After two to three days of their union, the husband had allegedly indicated to his wife about his intention to marry her elder sister's daughter. It is the allegation of the wife that having not agreed to the aforesaid proposal, she was subjected to mental and physical torture and having learnt about the torture, she was again taken back to her parents' home by her younger brother.

3.3 It is the further case of the complainant that after about 15 days, her husband married another woman, namely, Musstt. Subetun Nessa against their personal law. Even thereafter, complainant's father reconciled the matrimonial relation with the help of mediators and a re-conciliation agreement was executed. It is the further case of the complainant that she apprehended that her husband may misappropriate her 'stridhan' and the upbringing of their 9 year old daughter may also hamper. The wife has further alleged that her husband was also not providing proper medical treatment to her as well as adequate food and money for her medical treatment and as a result, she was suffering from economic, mental and physical torture. With these allegations. M.R. case No. 34 of 2008 was filed in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi on 26.3.2008.

4. Prior to filing of the complaint under Section 12 of the PWDV Act, the wife had also filed a case under Section 125 of the CrPC; being M.R. case No. 214 of 2006 as well as a case under Section 498A of the IPC being CR Case No. 638 of 2006. In this way, the present case under PWDV Act was filed nearly after two years of their separation.

4.1 By filing the aforesaid complaint u/s 12 of the PWDV Act, the wife prayed for return of 'stridhan', custody of the minor child, residence order and compensation under various Sections of the Act.

5. On receipt of a Report from the Protection Officer, the learned Magistrate passed an interim order on 17.5.2008, directing the husband to return the 'stridhan' and also hand over the custody of the minor child to the complainant.

6. On receipt of the notice, the husband filed two petitions on 2.5.2009. In the first application, the husband/petitioner prayed for closing the case, pleading that the alleged tortures were committed in the month of January. February and May, 2006, whe