1. According to the applicant, marriage was solemnized between him and respondent no. 2 on 15.06.2010, which was duly registered with the Registrar of Marriages. Subsequently, differences arose between them and a divorce petition was filed, which was decreed by learned Additional District Judge, Saharanpur, against which respondent no. 2 preferred an appeal. While admitting the appeal, Hon’ble Allahabad High Court directed the applicant to pay `15,000/- per month to the respondent no. 2, as alimony, which, according to the applicant, is being paid continuously.

2. Thereafter, respondent no. 2 filed an application under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Applicant raised question of maintainability of the application filed by the respondent no. 2 by filing an application on the ground that domestic relationship between applicant and respondent no. 2 does not exist anymore, after grant of decree of divorce by learned Additional District Judge, Saharanpur. Thus, it was contended on behalf of the applicant that the application made by respondent no. 2 is liable to be rejected on this score alone.

3. Learned Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, by placing reliance upon a judgment rendered by Bombay High Court in the case of Bharati Naik Vs. Ravi Ramnath Halarnkar & another, rejected the objection filed by the applicant by holding that wife can file application against her husband even after dissolution of marriage. The said order dated 21.07.2014 passed by learned Magistrate was challenged by applicant by filing Criminal Appeal No. 147 of 2014, which was dismissed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun vide judgment and order dated 02.05.2015.

4. During the pendency of the said appeal, respondent no. 2 filed an application under Section 12 read with Section 19 of the Act with the prayer that the applicant may also be directed to pay 7,000/- per month, as house rent to her. The said application was allowed by learned Magistrate vide order dated 03.12.2014 and applicant was directed to pay ` 7,000/-, as notional rent, to the respondent no. 2 under Section 19(1) (f) of the Act.

5. Thereafter, applicant moved an application on 17.06.2015 with the contention that since he is paying’ 15,000/- per month to respondent no. 2, as maintenance in terms of order passed by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court, therefore, the amount of notional rent awarded to respondent no. 2 vide order dated 03.12.2014 be adjusted against the amount paid to respondent no. 2 in terms of order of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court. The said application was rejected by learned Magistrate on 27.06.2015, by holding that the amount of notional rent cannot be adjusted in the maintenance amount ordered to be paid by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court. It was further observed that the order dated 03.12.2014 has not been challenged before any forum; therefore, the said order has attained finality.

6. Applicant challenged the order dated 27.06.2015 by filing Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 2015, which too was dismissed by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun vide judgment dated 19.08.2015. Thereafter, learned Magistrate passed an order on 30.09.2015 for issuing recovery warrant against the applicant, fixing 31.10.2015. Thus, feeling aggrieved, applicant has approached this Court challenging the orders dated 27.06.2015 and 30.09.2015 passed by learned Magistrate and also the judgment dated 19.08.2015 passed by learned VIIth Additional Sessions Judge.

7. The sole contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that since marriage between applicant and respondent no. 2 was dissolved by a competent Court of law, therefore, learned Courts below erred in entertaining the application moved by respondent no. 2 under the Act. He further submits that provisions of the Act can be invoked by the wife only during subsistence of domestic relationship between her and the husband and once relationship is severed by a decree