hand contended that in the application itself, in column no.3, it is
mentioned that the opposite party is now residing in the house of
her elder daughter namely, Santoshi Kumari Sahu at Phulbani
and that her present address is at Nadikhanda Sahi, Phulbani
and therefore, the Court of S.D.J.M., Phulbani has got
jurisdiction to entertain the application.
Section 27 of the 2005 Act deals with the jurisdiction
of the competent Court to pass necessary orders under the Act
and also to try the offences under the Act.
Section 27 of 2005 Act reads as follows:-
“27. Jurisdiction.-(1) The Court of Judicial
Magistrate of the First Class or the Metropolitan
Magistrate, as the case may be, within the local
limits of which:-
(a) the person aggrieved permanently or
temporarily resides or carries on business
or is employed; or
(b) the respondent resides or carries on
business or is employed; or
(c) the cause of action has arisen,
shall be the competent Court to grant a
protection order and other orders under
this Act and to try offences under this Act.
(2) Any order made under this Act shall be
enforceable throughout India.”
Thus in view of section 27, if the ‘aggrieved person’
either permanently or temporarily resides at a place, the Court of
Judicial Magistrate of the First Class within the local limits whose
jurisdiction such place situates is competent to entertain an
application under Section 12 of 2005 Act and to grant protection
order and other orders under the Act or try the offences under
the Act.
The legislature in its wisdom has provided that
jurisdiction can be invoked by an ‘aggrieved person’ before the
competent Court on the basis of temporary residence. The word
“temporarily” means lasting, existing, serving for a time only
which is not permanent. A temporary residence is a temporary
dwelling place of the aggrieved person who has for the time
being decided to make that place as her home. An aggrieved
person who has lost her matrimonial home due to domestic
violence and was not even allowed to stay at her ancestral house
or at her father’s place for some reason or the other and is
compelled to take residence, though temporarily, either with one
of her relatives or with one of her friends at a place where the
domestic violence was not committed can invoke the jurisdiction
of the Magistrate within whose local limits such place of
temporary residence situates. The temporary residence includes
a place where the aggrieved person was compelled to reside in
view of commission of domestic violence. She may not have
decided to reside there permanently or for a considerable length
of time but for the time being. A place where the aggrieved
person has gone on a casual visit, a lodge or hostel or a guest
house or an inn where she stays for a short period or a residence
at a place simply for the purpose of filing a case against another
person cannot be a place which would satisfy the term
“temporarily resides” as appears in section 27. The legislature
has provided the aggrieved women who are financially,
economically or physically abused wide options to institute a
case which best suited their convenience, comfort and
accessibility. Section 2(i) of 2005 Act indicates “Magistrate” 6
means the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, or as the case
may be, the Metropolitan Magistrate, exercising jurisdiction
under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) in the
area were the aggrieved person resides temporarily or otherwise
or the respondents resides or the domestic violence is alleged to
have taken place. Thus even if for a temporary period of time, an
aggrieved person is residing at a place, she can seek reliefs
under the 2005 Act by filing an appropriate application before
the competent Court within the local limits whose jurisdiction
such place situates.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
TRPCRL NO. 20 of 2016
Rabindra Nath Sahu V Smt. Susila Sahu
P R E S E N T:
MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
Dated- 14.09.2016
Citation: 2016 CRLJ4931
S. K. Sahoo, J. Mother’s love is divine. It is unselfish and unending.
It flows gently but unrelentingly like the holy water of Ganges.
Mother is the root which takes all the pain in growing the child
plant and feeds him right from the womb. She is the truest
friend who gives support to her child in every situation. She
takes food only after her child eats satisfactorily; she sleeps only
when her child sleeps comfortably. What a tragedy when a 2
widow mother in the twilight of her life is compelled to leave the
house by none else than her son and daughter-in-law?
The petitioners are the son and daughter-in-law of
the opposite party.
The opposite party filed an application under section
12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
(hereafter ‘2005 Act’) in the Court of S.D.J.M., Phulbani against
the petitioners seeking reliefs under the Act which was registered
as Misc. Case No.3 of 2016.
It is the case of the opposite party that the
petitioners subjected her to physical and mental cruelty and
drove her out of the house for which she was constrained to take
shelter in the house of her elder daughter Santoshi Kumari
Sahoo at Nadikhanda Sahi, Phulbani.
This application under section 407 of Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioners seeking for transfer of Misc. Case
No.3 of 2016 pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Phulbani to the
Court of S.D.J.M., Berhampur.
Heard Mr. Ashok Das, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Miss Deepali Mohapatra, learned counsel for the
opposite party.3
Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that
the ancestral house of the opposite party is at Berhampur and
now she is also staying at Berhampur and she had earlier
instituted two cases against the petitioner no.1 at Berhampur
and therefore, the S.D.J.M. Court at Phulbani has no jurisdiction
to entertain the application under section 12 of 2005 Act filed by
the opposite party and therefore, the case should be transferred
to the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur.
Learned counsel for the opposite party on the other
hand contended that in the application itself, in column no.3, it is
mentioned that the opposite party is now residing in the house of
her elder daughter namely, Santoshi Kumari Sahu at Phulbani
and that her present address is at Nadikhanda Sahi, Phulbani
and therefore, the Court of S.D.J.M., Phulbani has got
jurisdiction to entertain the application.
Section 27 of the 2005 Act deals with the jurisdiction
of the competent Court to pass necessary orders under the Act
and also to try the offences under the Act.
Section 27 of 2005 Act reads as follows:-
“27. Jurisdiction.-(1) The Court of Judicial
Magistrate of the First Class or the Metropolitan
Magistrate, as the case may be, within the local
limits of which:-4
(a) the person aggrieved permanently or
temporarily resides or carries on business
or is employed; or
(b) the respondent resides or carries on
business or is employed; or
(c) the cause of action has arisen,
shall be the competent Court to grant a
protection order and other orders under
this Act and to try offences under this Act.
(2) Any order made under this Act shall be
enforceable throughout India.”
Thus in view of section 27, if the ‘aggrieved person’
either permanently or temporarily resides at a place, the Court of
Judicial Magistrate of the First Class within the local limits whose
jurisdiction such place situates is competent to entertain an
application under Section 12 of 2005 Act and to grant protection
order and other orders under the Act or try the offences under
the Act.
The legislature in its wisdom has provided that
jurisdiction can be invoked by an ‘aggrieved person’ before the
competent Court on the basis of temporary residence. The word
“temporarily” means lasting, existing, serving for a time only
which is not permanent. A temporary residence is a temporary
dwelling place of the aggrieved person who has for the time
being decided to make that place as her home. An aggrieved
person who has lost her matrimonial home due to domestic
violence and was not even allowed to stay at her ancestral house
or at her father’s place for some reason or the other and is
compelled to take residence, though temporarily, either with one
of her relatives or with one of her friends at a place where the
domestic violence was not committed can invoke the jurisdiction
of the Magistrate within whose local limits such place of
temporary residence situates. The temporary residence includes
a place where the aggrieved person was compelled to reside in
view of commission of domestic violence. She may not have
decided to reside there permanently or for a considerable length
of time but for the time being. A place where the aggrieved
person has gone on a casual visit, a lodge or hostel or a guest
house or an inn where she stays for a short period or a residence
at a place simply for the purpose of filing a case against another
person cannot be a place which would satisfy the term
“temporarily resides” as appears in section 27. The legislature
has provided the aggrieved women who are financially,
economically or physically abused wide options to institute a
case which best suited their convenience, comfort and
accessibility. Section 2(i) of 2005 Act indicates “Magistrate” 6
means the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, or as the case
may be, the Metropolitan Magistrate, exercising jurisdiction
under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) in the
area were the aggrieved person resides temporarily or otherwise
or the respondents resides or the domestic violence is alleged to
have taken place. Thus even if for a temporary period of time, an
aggrieved person is residing at a place, she can seek reliefs
under the 2005 Act by filing an appropriate application before
the competent Court within the local limits whose jurisdiction
such place situates.
Since in the application under Section 12 of the 2005
Act, the opposite party who is the aggrieved person has
mentioned her present address as Nadikhanda Sahi, Phulbani
where she is staying in her elder daughter’s house being
subjected to domestic violence, the application is maintainable in
the Court of S.D.J.M., Phulbani, Even though the learned counsel
for the petitioners disputes the temporary abode of the opposite
party at Nadikhanda Sahi, Phulbani, I am of the opinion that in
this application under section 407 Cr.P.C., such disputed facts
cannot be adjudicated.
Thus the contentions raised by the learned counsel
for the petitioners being devoid of merits, the TRPCRL application
stands dismissed.
The learned Magistrate shall make every endeavour
to dispose of Misc. Case No.3 of 2016 within a period of sixty
days from the date of receipt of the order of this Court.
A copy of the order be sent to the learned S.D.J.M.,
Phulbani for compliance.
…………………………
S. K. Sahoo, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 14th September, 2016/ Kabita
No comments:
Post a Comment