The Family Court cannot adjudicate applications under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, as original jurisdiction lies with the Magistrate, despite the Family Court's ability to grant reliefs under Sections 18 to 22 in pending matters.

JUDGMENT

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA,J:

(A) FACTS

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 407 Cr.P.C . seeking transfer of CT Cases 578/2021 titled “AKANKSHA DUA VS. ASEEM KHANNA ETC.” pending before the court of Ld. MM, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi to the court of Ld. Judge, Family Court-02, South-East, Saket, Delhi and club with HMA No. 35/2023 titled “AKANSHA DUA V. ASEEM KHANNA” pending in the court of Ld. Judge, Family Court-02, South-East, Saket, Delhi.

2. The respondent has filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act bearing HMA No. 35/2023 titled “AKANSHA DUA V. ASEEM KHANNA” before the Family Court, South-East, Saket Court, Delhi. Subsequently, the respondent also filed a complaint under Section 12(1) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the „DV Act‟) seeking reliefs under Sections 17/18/19/20/22/23 of the DV Act bearing complaint case No. 578/2023 before Ld. MM, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.

3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner has sought transfer of the DV case to the family court and club the same under Section 24 of the CPC. The petitioner has stated that the Family Court, South-East, Saket, Delhi has power to grant the relief as has been sought by the respondent in the DV Act case. The petitioner has also submitted that Section 26 of the DV Act provides that the reliefs available under Section 18 to 22 of the DV Act can be sought in any legal proceeding before a Civil Court, Family Court or Criminal Court.

4. The petitioner has further submitted that Section 7 & 8 of the Family Court Act, 1984 confers jurisdiction on the Family Court which are analogous to that exercisable by a Magistrate of the first class under Chapter IX of the C.P.C. (in relation to order for maintenance of wife, children and parents). The petitioner has submitted that the transfer of the case would be convenient to the parties and would also be in the interest of the justice. It has been submitted that both the cases are at the initial stage and no prejudice shall be caused to either of the parties.

(B) SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations made in the Divorce petition and the DV complaint are similar and the cases have been filed only to harass the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the legislative intention behind Section 26 is to provide multiple options to the aggrieved women litigants to redress their grievances in a speedy manner and therefore the Family Court, civil court or Criminal Court has been clothed with the power to grant relief under Sections 18 to22 of the DV Act. Learned counsel further submitted that the Family Court, functions as a Civil Court and is conferred with the powers of a Civil Court and is competent to decide an Application filed under Section 12 of the DV Act in view of the power granted by Section 26 of the DV Act.

6. Learned counsel submits that this court in Garima Khera v. Anmol Kera , 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4117 , has inter alia directed that the Maintenance petition and Domestic Violence (DV) petition be tried by the same Court and transferred the Domestic Violence (DV) petition No. 1038/2021, titled as “Garima Khera v. Anmol Khera” from the court of Ld. MM, Patiala House Court, New Delhi to Ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, North District, Rohini Courts for assigning it to Ld. Judge, Family Court, North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi.

7. Learned counsel further submitted that the Bombay High Court also in Rohan Shah v. Nishigandha Shah , 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2719 has inter alia held that the Family Court is competent to try DV proceedings considering the objective of the Family Court. Learned counsel has further relied upon Sandip Mrinmoy Chakraboarty v. Reshita Sandip Chakrabarty, 2018 SCC OnLine Bom 2709 . Reliance has also been placed upon Santosh Machindra Mulik v. Mohini Mithu Choudhari, 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 13