THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.598 of 2008 Date of Order: 24-06-2010 Between: Gandham Suryakala and anaother ..Petitioners and Gandham Sridevi and another ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.598 of 2008 Oral order: Petitioners, who are respondents 2 and 4 in DVC No.1 of 2008 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings initiated against them alleging that the 1st respondent/complainant filed C.C.No.614 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kovvur; C.C.No.650 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 352, 324 r/w 34 IPC; O.P.No.493 of 2007 before the District Judge, Rajahmundry seeking to appoint her as guardian for the person and properties of her children, who are minors and O.P.No.218 of 2007 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry seeking divorce. In DVC.No.1 of 2008 summons were ordered, but the order of the Magistrate shows that no summons were issued, it was ordered only to inform the Protection Officer to find out whether any similar application is pending with him. Therefore, issuance of summons is not at all warranted under Section 12 Section of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short “the Act”). As per the provisions of the Act, the Magistrate cannot issue summons directly without obtaining report from the Protection Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 1st petitioner is the mother-in-law and 2nd petitioner is the husband of the de-facto complainant; therefore, proceedings against them are liable to be quashed or in the alternative their presence may be dispensed with. Admittedly, Protection orders as contemplated under Section 18 of the Act are in the form of injunction restraining the respondent from committing any act of domestic violence and for issuing necessary Residence orders under Section 19 of the Act Magistrate may require from the respondent to execute a bond for preventing the commission of domestic violence. Therefore, Magistrate can exercise not only civil jurisdiction but also criminal jurisdiction under the Act. In view of the same, proceedings cannot be quashed in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., when the 1st respondent/complainant is entitled to protect her rights from the domestic violence under Section 19 of the Act. Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to file an application to dispense with their appearance before the Magistrate or can get necessary orders that they can be represented by other respondents in DVC No.1 of 2008. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. 24-06-2010 Murthy