Section 12 of Protection of woment from Domestic Violance ac

the law itself says, why u need the citations?!!!!!!!!!!!!

yes, I can understand, ...some times the judges ask the citations for each and everything..

It is observed by the MP High court in the following case as:

Ajay Kant And Ors. vs Smt. Alka Sharma on 19 June, 2007, MP High court;

(E) The proceeding has also been assailed on the ground that no report from the Protection Officer under Section 12 of the Act has been called.

Sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act goes as under:

12. (1) An aggrieved person or a Protection Officer or any other person on behalf of the aggrieved person may present an application to the Magistrate seeking one or more reliefs under this Act:

Provided that before passing any order on such application, the Magistrate shall take into consideration any domestic incident report received by him from the Protection Officer or the service provider;

“On perusal of the aforementioned proviso appended to the provision, it appears that before passing any order on the application, it is obligatory on a Magistrate to take into consideration any report received by him from the Protection Officer or the service provider. Neither it is obligatory for a Magistrate to call such report nor it is necessary that before issuance of notice to the petitioners it was obligatory or a Magistrate to consider the report. The words before passing any order provide that any final order on the application and not merely issuance of notice to the respondent/the petitioners herein. The words any report also mention that report, if any, received by a Magistrate shall be considered. Thus, at this stage if the report has not been called or has not been considered, it cannot be a ground or quashing the proceeding.”

Equivalent citations: 2008 CriLJ 264, I (2008) DMC 1, 2007 (4) MPHT 62

@ Sh. Aejaz

1. No Law to the best of my evolving reading down till date has created so many different interpretations that also by various HC's of the land in SUCH A SHORT TIME of 4 years since its birth (emphasis is mine) than any other Family Law to begin with till date (such is the beauty that this funny DV Act has created and will create so many other vague milestones that one day every suit will end up before Hon’ble SC).

2.Below is FLIP update on your old 2007 citation which I am quoting from D HC which is mint fresh 2010 !!!.

3. So the position now is going to be that husband's side will now quote D HC and wife side will simultaneously quote MP HC on same question of Law (DIR interpretation) is it not so Sir? 

4. That is what happens when you draft a dumb Act for XXXX wife’s :-)

5. In my opinion there should be only one Amendment to this Act that is; "all wife's should be allowed to file DV Act complaint directly before Hon'ble SC and not before any other sub-ordinate forum" so that these different interpretations from different Bench of High Courts do not dilute further this very so called class legislation !!!!!!

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Crl.M.C.No. 1766/2010

08.10.2010

Date of Reserve: September 24, 2010
Date of Order: 8th October, 2010

Bhupender Singh Mehra ... Petitioner Through: Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advocate

Versus

State NCT of Delhi & Anr. ... Respondent Through: Mr. Anurag, Advocate for R-2

Crl.M.C.No. 1773/2010  08.10.2010

Diwan Singh Mehra ... Petitioner Through: Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advocate

Versus

State NCT of Delhi & Anr. ... Respondent Through: Mr. Anurag, Advocate for R-2

JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA


Click below link for full text :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/504347/

you visit share files of  LCI