- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF MAY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 200043 OF 2025 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200769 OF 2025 IN CRL.R.P. NO. 200043 OF 2025 BETWEEN: PRAKASH S/O GANAPATI JAMADAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS OCC DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR IN KSRTC NO.2237 DAVANGERI DEPOT NO.1 DAVANGERI DIVISION R/O NAGALGAON TQ.ALAND DIST.KALABURAGI …PETITIONER (BY SMT. REKHA PATIL, ADV. FOR SRI. G G CHAGASHETTI, ADV.) AND: 1. YAMUNABAI W/O PRAKASH JAMADAR AGE 41 YEARS, OCC : H.H. WORK 2. BHAVANI D/O PRAKASH JAMADAR AGE 10 YEARS, OCC : STUDENT Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 3. VAIBHAV S/O PRAKASH JAMADAR AGE 7 YEARS, OCC : STUDENT (SINCE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS MINOR GUARDIAN IS THEIR MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN) ALL ARE R/A NAGALGAON TQ ALAND DIST.KALABURAGI TEMPORARILY R/AT MALGHAN TQ ALMEL, DIST.VIJAYAPUR 586 101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.YASHAS S. DIXSHIT, ADV. FOR R1; R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REP. BY R1) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S 397 (1) OF CR.P.C (OLD), U/SEC. 438 (1) R/W 442 OF BNSS (NEW), BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE ABOVE CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.03.2025 PASSED BY II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION VIJAYAPUR IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 80/2024 BY CONFIMRING THE ORDER PASSED ON IA MAIN PETITION AND AS WELL AS I.A. I DATED 04.10.2024 IN CRL.MISC.NO. 191/2024 BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SINDAGI IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200769 OF 2025 BETWEEN: PRAKASH S/O GANAPATI JAMADAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS OCC DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR IN KSRTC NO.2237, DAVANGERI DEPOT NO.1, DAVANGERI DIVISION R/O NAGALGAON TQ.ALAND DIST.KALABURAGI … PETITIONER (BY SMT. REKHA PATIL, ADV. FOR SRI. G G CHAGASHETTI, ADV.) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 AND: 1. YAMUNABAI W/O PRAKASH JAMADAR AGE 41 YEARS, OCC : H.H WORK 2. BHAVANI D/O PRAKASH JAMADAR AGE 10 YEARS, OCC : STUDENT 3. VAIBHAV S/O PRAKASH JAMADAR AGE 7 YEARS, OCC : STUDENT (SINCE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS MINOR GUARDIAN IS THEIR MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN) ALL ARE R/A NAGALGAON TQ ALAND DIST.KALABURAGI TEMPORARILY R/AT MALGHAN TQ ALMEL, DIST.VIJAYAPUR 586 101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.YASHAS S. DIXSHIT, ADV. FOR R1; R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REP. BY R1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 407 OF CR.P.C. (OLD), UNDER SECTION 447 OF BNNS (NEW), PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND TRANSFER CRIL.MISC. NO.191/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SE. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SINDAGI TO CIVIL AND JMFC ALAND, DIST. KALBURGI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION AND CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. In Crl.R.P No.200043/2025, the husband prays to set aside the order dated 03.03.2025 passed in Crl.A No.80/2024 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge by confirming the order passed on main petition as well as I.A No.I dated 04.10.2024 in Cril.Misc.No.191/2024 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindagi. 2. In Crl.P No.200769/2025, the husband of the respondent No.1 filed a petition seeking to transfer Crl.Misc.No.191/2004 pending on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindagi to Civil Judge and JMFC, Aland, Kalaburagi. Brief facts of the case: 3. The petitioner and respondent No.1 are husband and wife. Their marriage was solemnized on 25.05.2014 in Ambha Bhavani Temple, Gubbi Colony, Sedam Road, Kalaburagi. Respondent No.1 filed a petition in Crl.Misc. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 No.191/2024 seeking certain reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (for short “PWDV Act”). In the said petition, she filed an interim application under Section 23(1)(2) of the PWDV Act on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindagi. In the said application, she sought for maintenance a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. The Trial Court dismissed the petition, opined that the petition has been filed beyond its jurisdiction. As against the said order, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Appellate Court. The Appellate Court allowed the appeal by setting aside the order of the Trial Court and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner herein seeking to set aside the order of the Appellate Court by restoring the Trial Court order and one more petition filed for transfer of petition filed before the Court at Sindagi to Kalaburagi. Hence, these two matters have been clubbed together for consideration. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 5. It is the submission of the petitioner that respondent No.1 is a permanent resident of Kalaburagi. She had filed a case before the Court at Sindagi only in order to harass the petitioner in one or the other pretext by taking the advantage of Section 27 of the PWDV Act. 6. It is further submitted that the Appellate Court while considering the appeal, committed error in understanding the intent of the Legislature in enacting the said provision. As a result of which, the impugned order has been emerged. Therefore, the same has to be set aside. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow both the petitions. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently justified the order of the Appellate Court and he further submitted that the order of the Appellate Court is proper for the reason that Section 27 of PWDV Act would indicate that the respondent has to approach the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class or Metropolitan Magistrate within the local limits of which the respondent resides either permanently or temporarily. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 8. It is further submitted that the respondent was residing in the address as stated in the petition. Therefore, the Court at Sindagi has jurisdiction to consider the petition. However, the Trial Court has wrongly interpreted the provision and dismissed the petition by directing the respondent to approach the proper Court would be an erroneous order. Therefore, the order of the Appellate Court has to be upheld in accordance with law. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the respondent prays to dismiss the petitions. 9. Having gone through the divergent findings of the Courts below in arriving at a conclusion, it is appropriate to rely on the provision of Section 27 of the PWDV Act, which reads as under: 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 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 (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. 10. On careful reading of the above said provision, it makes it clear that the person has to approach the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class or the Metropolitan Magistrate within the local limits of which the person aggrieved, either resides permanently or temporarily or carries on business or is employed or the respondent resides or carries on business or is employed or the cause of action has arisen. 11. The meaning of the above said provision would indicate that, aggrieved person has to approach the Court within the local limits of which she might have resided either permanently or temporarily. In the present case, it is submitted that the respondent though is the permanent resident of Kalaburagi, she filed a case before the Court - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 at Sindagi. Though it appears from the record that she is residing in the address stated in the cause title of the petition, there is no justification to justify that she is either residing in the said address permanently or temporarily or carrying on any business or is employed in the above said address. 12. Without placing any records to show that she is residing in the said address either permanently or temporarily, allowing the petition by setting aside the order of the Trial Court appears to be not proper and the Appellate Court had no justification to entertain the petition. Therefore, the order of the Appellate Court has to be set aside. 13. In the light of the observations made above, I am of the considered opinion that, once this petition is allowed, the order of the Appellate Court has to be set aside and the order of the Trial Court has to be restored. Such being the fact, considering one more criminal petition to transfer the case from Sindagi to Kalaburagi may not be appropriate and proper, therefore, it has to be disposed of with the observations stated above. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2657 CRL.RP No. 200043 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 200769 of 2025 14. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) Crl.R.P.No.200043/2025 is allowed. ii) The order dated 03.03.2025, passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapura in Criminal Appeal No.80/2024, is set aside. iii) The order of the Trial Court dated 04.10.2024, in Criminal Miscellaneous No.191/2024 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindagi is restored. iv) The respondent is directed to file a petition before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction. v) Crl.P.No.200769/2025 is disposed of as the prayer has become infructuous. vi) In view of the disposal of the main petitions, pending I.As, does not survive for consideration and the same is also disposed of. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE RSP/UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14