ORDER :

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/Respondent, seeking to withdraw the petition in M.C.No.8 of 2014, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry and to transfer the same to the file of the learned Family Judge, Puducherry.

2. The Petitioner is the husband and respondent in M.C.No.8 of 2014, filed under Section 12 (1) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (herein after referred as D.V. Act), pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry.

3. The fact remains that the petitioner/husband had originally filed H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2014, before the learned Subordinate Judge, Villupuram, against his wife seeking divorce, on the ground of wilful desertion and cruelty. Meanwhile, the respondent/wife had filed M.C.No.2 of 2014, on the file of the learned Family Judge, Puducherry, under Section 125 (1) (a) (b) of Cr.P.C., seeking maintenance. While so, at the instance of the wife, for transferring the petition in H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2014, this Court, passed an order dated 11.08.2014 in Tr.C.M.P.No.303 of 2014, transferring H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2014 which is now pending on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Villupuram, to be transferred to the file of the Family Court, Puducherry for joint trial, to be tried along with M.C.No.2 of 2013.

4. Pursuant to the order dated 11.08.2014, the divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2014, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Villupuram, was transferred to the file of the learned Family Judge, Puducherry and the same was re-numbered as M.O.P.No.37 of 2015. While, these proceedings were pending on the file of the learned Family Judge, Puducherry, the respondent/wife had filed M.C.No.8 of 2014, under Section 12(1) of D.V. Act, 2005, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry, seeking for a relief under Section 18 to 20 of D.V.Act, 2005. The petitioner has contested the same, by filing a counter, while so, in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner/husband, seeking to transfer the M.C.No.8 of 2014 and the same to be heard along with M.C.No.2 of 2014 and M.O.P.No.37 of 2015, which is pending on the file of the learned Family Judge, Puducherry.

5. Despite, the service of notice and printing of the name of the respondent, the respondent is not present before this Court today, thereby, this Court had appointed Ms.Saradha Devi, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), to represent the respondent in this case.

6. Mr. D. Ravichander, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband would submit that as per Section 26 of the D.V.Act, any relief sought for under Section 18, 19, 20, 21 & 22 of the D.V.Act, and also be claimed in any proceedings pending before the Civil Court, Family Court or the Criminal Court by the aggrieved person, the Respondent/wife had filed a separate petition, in M.C.No.12 of 2014, seeking maintenance, which is pending on the file of the Family Court. When such being so, there is no bar in transferring the present petition in M.C.No.8 of 2014, which is pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry, to the file of the Family Court to be tried along with M.C.No.2 of 2014 and M.O.P.No.37 of 2015. He would further submit that this Court in a recent decision rendered in Crl.O.P.No.28458 of 2021 and Batch matters, dated 18.01.2021, has held that the proceedings under the D.V.Act are Civil in nature and that the Court tried proceedings under the D.V.Act is not a Criminal Court and thereby, there is no bar for the case, which in now pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Puducherry, being transferred to the file of the Family Court, Puducherry. He would submit that the parties involved and the issues involved are one and the same and thereby, it is necessary that the case has to be transferred to the file of the Family Court, Puducherry, to avoid multiplicity of proceed