AZIMUDDIN ALIAS KUNTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMAR Saran, J. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned A. G. A.

(2.) A notice under Sections 9 (b) and 37 (2) (1c) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, hereinafter referred to as the Act, dated 14-11-2007 has been challenged by means of this application under Section 482, Cr. P. C.

(3.) THE third contention raised in the application was that the essence of the Act was only to protect women when she was staying her marital house with her husband and not after she had gone to her maternal home and admittedly in this case she was living in her maternal home since 20-9-2005. I do not think that in the Act there is any such requirement. THE Act specifically provides under Sec tion 2 (f) that "domestic relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live, or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the na ture of marriage etc. THErefore, the requirement of immediate residence is not necessary.