PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 154
[Sindh High Court, Karachi]
Present: Mrs. Rashida Asad, J.
MUHAMMAD MUNIR--Applicant
versus
ANUM THANVI and 3 others--Respondents
Crl. Misc. Appln. No. 51 of 2020, decided on 24.4.2020.
Domestic violence--
----'Women and children'--Prima facie, it was enacted to provide protection to weakest class of society i.e. 'women and children', as normally, we are presumptively living a 'male dominant society' where aggrieved even does not dare to tell about 'domestic violence', because of threats of being abandoned, killed, hurt, or removed from household--This appears sole reason that legislature enacted Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act, 2013 in order to provide protection to them. [Para 4] A
Domestic violence (Prevention and Protection) Act, 2013 (XX of 2013)--
----Ss. 7(3), 2(1)(a) & 13--Now I would like to discuss relevant Sections of Act 2013--Section 2(l)(a) of Act, prima facie provides definition of 'aggrieved person', which includes a woman, child or any vulnerable person in a domestic relationship with respondent and who is alleged to be victim of domestic violence, sub-section (1)(d) provides definition of 'Court', which means Judicial Magistrate of First Class--However, Section 7 empowers an aggrieved person or his authorized person or informer to file petition in respect of offence of domestic violence and Section 13 deals with grant of temporary custody of an aggrieved person--Procedure for issuance of notice with or without interim order is provided u/S. 7(3) of Act.
[Para 5] B
Domestic violence (Prevention and Protection) Act, 2013 (XX of 2013)--
----S. 7--Criminal petition--Application of--Production of minor--Very purpose for enactment of The Act, 2013 is to provide protection
to women, children and any vulnerable person from domestic violence--In present case, Respondent No. 1 has leveled specific allegations of domestic abuse in her petition filed under Act 2013 against applicant, which provides a procedure to deal with case--It appears that Magistrate by taking cognizance of matter only issued a notice to applicant with direction to produce child, such order is challenged by applicant--Admittedly applicant has every opportunity to defend and prove his innocence before Magistrate, thus, challenging of said order is nothing but to frustrate proceedings at this very initial stage and therefore, applicant cannot be allowed to defeat very purpose of Act for which it was enacted--Application dismissed. [Para 6] C
Mr. Imdad Ali Sahito Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Raj Ali Wahid Kunwar Advocate for Respondent No. 1.
Syed Meeran Shah Bukhari Additional Prosecutor General Sindh for State.
Date of hearing: 11.3.2020.
Order
Through this Cr. Misc. Application, the applicant has assailed an order dated 28.01.2020, whereby the learned XI-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South dismissed the revision application filed by the applicant against the orders dated 18.01.2020 and 23.01.2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-VII, Karachi South, in criminal petition, filed by the Respondent No. 1 under Section 7 of the Domestic Violence (Prevent and Protection) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
2. The brief facts for disposal of the instant application are that Respondent No. 1/ mother of minor Kian Munir filed an application under Section 7 of the Act, wherein the learned Magistrate issued notice to the applicant (father of minor) for production of minor boy Kian Munir before the Court. The applicant challenged the said order on the ground of jurisdiction, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 23.01.2020, therefore the said orders were assailed by the applicant through revision before the XI-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South, which met the same fate, hence this Criminal Misc. Application.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record minutely. The preamble of the Act 2013 is sufficient to describe the importance and vitality thereof which reads as under:
"WHEREAS, it is expedient to institutionalize measures which prevent and protect women, children and any vulnerable person from domestic violence and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto."
4. Prima facie, it was enacted to provide protection to the weakest class of society i.e. 'women and children', as normally, we are presumptively living a 'male dominant society' where aggrieved even does not dare to tell about 'domestic violence', because of threats of being abandoned, killed, hurt, or removed from household. This appears the sole reason that the legislature enacted the Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act, 2013 in order to provide protection to them.
5. Now I would like to discuss the relevant Sections of the Act 2013. Section 2(l)(a) of the Act, prima facie provides the definition of 'aggrieved person', which includes a woman, child or any vulnerable person in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who is alleged to be victim of the domestic violence, sub-section (1)(d) provides the definition of 'Court', which means Judicial Magistrate of First Class. However, Section 7 empowers an aggrieved person or his authorized person or informer to file petition in respect of offence of domestic violence and Section 13 deals with grant of temporary custody of an aggrieved person. Procedure for issuance of notice with or without interim order is provided under Section 7(3) of. the Act.
6. The learned counsel for the applicant has contended that learned trial Court wrongly took cognizance of the case as proper course for parties to have custody of the child is provided under the Guardian and Wards Act, which procedure is overridden by filing the criminal petition before the learned Magistrate. It is observed that very purpose for enactment of The Act, 2013 is to provide protection to women, children and any vulnerable person from domestic violence. In the present case, Respondent No. 1 has leveled specific allegations of domestic abuse in her petition filed under the Act 2013 against the applicant, which provides a procedure to deal with the case. It appears that the learned Magistrate by taking cognizance of the matter only issued a notice to the applicant with direction to produce the child, such order is challenged by the applicant. Admittedly the applicant has every opportunity to defend and prove his innocence before the learned Magistrate, thus, challenging of the said order is nothing but to frustrate the proceedings at this very initial stage and therefore, the applicant cannot be allowed to defeat the very purpose of the Act for which it was enacted.
7. For the foregoing reasons, I see no reason to interfere in the impugned order, hence the instant criminal Misc. Application is dismissed.
(A.A.K.) Application dismissed
