IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that amendments to applications under the Domestic Violence Act are permissible as the proceedings are civil in nature, aimed at providing justice without causing prejudice to the parties involved.

JUDGMENT :

Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned AGAI for the State respondents and Sri Kuldeep Singh Parmar, learned counsel for respondent no. 2.

2. The present petition has been filed seeking to assail the order dated 18.08.2022 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ghatampur, Kanpur Dehat in Case No. 474 of 2019 (Mashroof Raza alias Sonu Khatoon Vs. Waseem Ahmad and others), under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005[D.V. Act], and the subsequent order dated 03.10.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Kanpur Dehat in Criminal Revision No. 76 of 2022 (Saleem Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another), whereby the earlier order has been affirmed.

3. The facts of the case as reflected from the pleadings in the petition indicate that an application dated 21.12.2019 was moved by the respondent no. 3 seeking an amendment in the relief clause of an earlier application dated 03.08.2019 which had been filed under Section 12 of the D.V. Act. The application seeking amendment sought deletion of a part of the relief clause, stating that due to an inadvertent typographical error, maintenance had been sought for 'the minor son', whereas the applicant did not have any minor son.

4. The petitioner herein, who is the father of the husband of the respondent no. 3 (applicant in D.V. Case), raised objections to the amendment application by contending that no such amendment was permissible in a criminal proceeding.

5. Learned Magistrate passed an order dated 18.08.2022 allowing the application dated 21.02.2019 seeking amendment, and observing that the said application be read along with the main application, fixed a date for passing of further order.

6. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred a revision, which has been rejected by an order dated 03.10.2023, wherein the revisional court has held that proceedings under the D.V. Act are quasi civil in nature, and accordingly, amendments to pleadings were permissible.

7. The order passed by the learned Magistrate on the amendment application and the subsequent revisional order, are sought to be assailed by means of the present petition.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to challenge the orders passed by the learned Magistrate and the revisional court by referring to the factual aspects of the case and the defence which is to be set up on behalf of the petitioner to contest the proceedings.

9. Learned AGAI appearing for the State respondents and also the counsel appearing for the respondent no. 3 have supported the orders passed by the learned Magistrate and also the revisional court by submitting that proceedings under D.V. Act are essentially of a civil nature and in a situation where amendment is necessary, the Court concerned would have power to allow such amendments.

10. It is submitted that the amendment sought in the present case was to correct an inadvertent typographical error, and the objections which were sought to be raised by the petitioner herein were solely with a view to delay the proceedings, and the said objections have been rightly turned down by the learned Magistrate.

11. The question which, thus, falls for consideration in the present case is with regard to the extent of the powers of amendment of pleadings exerciseable in proceedings under the D.V. Act.

12. The proceedings under the D.V. Act, in the instant case, were initiated pursuant to an application filed under Section 12 wherein the reliefs sought are referable to the provisions under Sections 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the said Act.

13. The genesis of the D.V. Act is traceable to the General Recommendation No. XII (1989) made by the United Nations Committee on Convention of Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), in terms of which it was recommended that the State parties, should act to protect women against violence of any kind especially, t