The main legal point established in the judgment is the maintainability of a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to challenge the proceedings filed under Chapter IV of the D.V.Act, and the availability of a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India if the proceedings before the learned Magistrate suffer from a patent lack of jurisdiction.

Headnote:
D.V.Act - Maintainability of Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Summary of Acts and Sections
Fact of the Case:

The court addressed the maintainability of a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V.Act). The court considered conflicting judgments and references made by learned Single Judges and a Division Bench of the court, and the applicability of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings initiated under the D.V.Act.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the proceedings under Chapter IV of the D.V.Act are civil in nature and that a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be maintained to challenge the proceedings filed under Chapter IV of the D.V.Act. The court also held that a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India may still be maintainable if it is shown that the proceedings before the learned Magistrate suffer from a patent lack of jurisdiction.
Issues: The court addressed the issues of whether a proceeding under Section 12 of the D.V.Act can be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution or under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and whether the remedy is available to an aggrieved person before approaching the learned Magistrate and, if necessary, the Court of Sessions by way of an appeal under Section 29 of the D.V.Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be maintained to challenge the proceedings filed under Chapter IV of the D.V.Act, and that a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India may still be maintainable if it is shown that the proceedings before the learned Magistrate suffer from a patent lack of jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The court directed the Registry to place the matters before the Chief Justice for constituting a Bench of requisite strength to authoritatively decide the questions of whether a proceeding under Section 12 of the D.V.Act can be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution or under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and whether the remedy is available to an aggrieved person before approaching the learned Magistrate and, if necessary, the Court of Sessions by way of an appeal under Section 29 of the D.V.Act.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer in Crl.O.P.SR.No.31852 of 2022: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in D.V.C.No.74 of 2022, on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Court, Thiruvallur and quash the same.)

Common Order:

1. These petitions have been filed seeking to quash the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘D.V.Act’) by invoking the provisions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’)

2. As this Court entertained doubt about invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the complaint filed under Section 12 of the D.V.Act, these petition have been listed under the caption “For Maintainability”.

3. Till recently, in pursuance to the judgment of a learned Single Judge (Hon’ble Mr.Justice N.Anand Venkatesh) of this Court in Dr.P.Pathamnathan Vs. V.Monica reported in (2021) 2 CTC 570, petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C., challenging the proceedings initiated under the D.V.Act has not been entertained.

4. However, in view of the latest judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in P.Ganesan Vs. M.Revathy Prema Rubarani in C.R.P.PD(MD)Nos.909 of 2021 etc., batch dated 12.07.2022, several petitions started flooding invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the D.V.Act.

5. The background on which the Hon’ble Division Bench has passed the said order is relevant for addressing the issue. A reference was placed before the Hon’ble The Chief Justice by two learned Single Judges of this Court viz., Hon’ble Mr.Justice R.Subramanian and Hon’ble Mr.Justice K.Murali Shankar.

6. Hon’ble Mr.Justice K.Murali Shankar by order dated 27.09.2021, in C.R.P.PD(MD) Nos.909 and 915 of 2021 has raised the following questions to be answered on reference:

“(i) Whether the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act before the Magistrate Courts are Civil proceedings or Criminal proceedings?

(ii) Assuming that the proceedings are civil in nature, whether the High Court can exercise its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, in respect of the said proceedings?

(iii) Whether the provisions of Section 468 of Cr.P.C, are applicable for the proceedings initiated under the Domestic Violence Act?

(iv) Assuming that Section 468 Cr.P.C, is not applicable, what is the period of limitation for initiating the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act?

(v) Whether the proceedings initiated under the Domestic Violence Act and pending before the Magistrate Court can be transferred to Civil Court or Family Court, by invoking Article 227 of Constitution of India.? ”

7. Hon’ble Mr.Justice R.Subramanian, in his reference made in Tr.C.M.P.No.478 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.12676 of 2021, dated 06.12.2021 has observed as follows:

“In this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, the husband seeks transfer of proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act pending before the Magistrate to the Family Court to be tried along with HMOP.

2. In Crl.O.P.No.17235 of 2016, the Hon'ble Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira had after concluding that the power under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be used to transfer of proceeding pending before the Magistrate to the Family Court, invoked the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and transferred the proceedings before the Magistrate to the Family Court. However, subsequently in TR.CMP.SR.No.15785 of 2021, Hon'ble Justice S.M.Subramaniam has held that the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked for transfer of cases.

3. He further went on to conclude that Section 24 cannot be invoked for transfer of Criminal cases to the Family Court to be tried along with HMOPs or Guardian O.P.s or other matrimonial proceedings.

4. The learned counsel for the petit