The court clarified the jurisdiction of the Family Court and the Magistrate in granting protection orders and other reliefs under the Act 2005.

JUDGMENT

( 1 ) "amittere Legem Terrce" (To be put out of the protection of the law) is the grievance of the petitioner in this application under Section 482, Cr. PC.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the opposite party No. 2 married to one of the sons of the opposite party No. 2, namely, ramesh Chandra Behera. who is stated to be born through the first wife of the opposite party No. 2. The opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 are the younger brothers of the husband of the petitioner being the sons of opposite party no. 2 through his second wife.

( 3 ) ALLEGING that the petitioner and her children were tortured physically and mentally by the opposite parties and her ornaments were forcibly removed from her by them and she was thrown out of her matrimonial house on 6-11-2006 along with her three minor children in the absence of her husband, she filed an application before the learned J. M. F. C. Pattamundai under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 2005' ). In the said complaint petition numbered as I. C. C. Case No. 152 of 2006, the petitioner sought for the following reliefs. "i) Protection order u/s. 18 prohibiting acts of Domestic Violence by granting an injunction against Respondents for repeating any such acts and prohibiting respondents for alienations of any of assets by the Respondents and pay compensation and also the amount as aforesaid towards loss of earnings and ornaments of applicant. ii) Residence order u/s. 19 an order restraining Respondents from dispossessing or throwing applicant out from her shared house hold and alienating or disposing or encumbering the said shared house of applicant and an order directing Respondents to put applicant into possession in respect of her said matrimonial shared house or secured some lebel of ulternate accommodation or pay rent for same. iii) Monetary reliefs under Section 20 the respondents be directed to pay applicant following amount:

Loss of earnings, amount claimed

Rs. 05,000/-

Loss of Ornaments

Rs . 20,000/-

Compensation towards physical and Mental torture

Rs . 15,000/-

Total amount claimed

(Rupees forty Rs. 40,000/- thousand only)

iv) Monetary reliefs under Section 20 v) Custody order u/s, 21 not applicable. vi) Compensation Order u/s. 22 as aforesaid. vii) Any other order please specify. That, the applicant along with her minor children may please be put into their possession in respect of their matrimonial shared house at the instance of the OIC, Pattamundai ps. after obtaining undertaking from Respondents for said custody of applicant and her minor children located over Plot No. 243 of Village Tatana, PS. Pattamundai, Dist. Kendrapara. "

( 4 ) THE learned Magistrate by his order dated 20-1-2007 perusing the complaint petition and observing that the complainant has prayed to pass orders under Sections 15/19/ 20/21 of the 2005 Act, came to a conclusion that since the area of the said Court comes under the judgeship of Cuttack and there is existence of Family Court in the judgeship, in view of Sections 7 and 8 of the Family courts Act, 1984 and under Section 26 of act, 2005 returned the complaint petition to the complainant to file the same in the appropriate Court of law.

( 5 ) THE petitioner finding no other alternative approached the Judge, Family Court,cuttack in Criminal Proceeding No. 148 of 2007. By order dated 1-5-2007, the learned judge, Family Court, Cuttack referring to section 2 (1) of the Act, 2005 and Section 7 (2) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1984') came to a conclusion that as no relief for maintenance is sought for by the petitioner according to section 20 (1) (d) and Section 20 (3) of the Act,1984, the Family Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the proceeding.

( 6 ) BEING, thus, placed between the horns of dilemma, the petitioner has approached this Court in the present case. The only question to be addressed by this Court is with regard