THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.12099 of 2011 Dated 18th August, 2011 Between: Kolusu Pitcheswara Rao …Petitioner And Protection Officer (Domestic Violence Protection Act, 2005) & Project Director, District Women & Child Welfare Agency, 59-1-2, Ashok Nagar, near ITI Bus Stop, Vijayawada-8, Krishna District and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S.Raju Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Women Dev. & Child Welfare The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside proceedings bearing No.106/2011/DVC, dated 16.04.2011, of respondent No.1. The petitioner is the husband of respondent No.3. It appears, disputes between the petitioner and his wife persisted, leading to registration of cases against the petitioner. Respondent No.3 approached respondent No.1 with a complaint under the provisions of the Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short ‘the Act’). Responding to the said complaint, respondent No.1 has issued the impugned notice calling upon the petitioner to appear before him on 27.04.2011. The petitioner has pleaded that the complaint given by respondent No.3 is intended only to harass him and that the same constitutes abuse of process of law. In my opinion, respondent No.1 concededly has jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice. The Act is made with the avowed object of protecting the women from domestic violence. Any interference at the threshold by the superior Courts would be likely to frustrate the object and purpose for which the statute is enacted. If the petitioner has material to substantiate his plea that the complaint given by respondent No.3 is intended to harass him and that the same has no basis, he is entitled to appear before respondent No.1 and substantiate the same by producing the material in his possession. In this view of the matter, I do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned notice issued by respondent No.1 Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.14795 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 18th August, 2011 VGB