Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Suresh Kahiram Mapari, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 21.05.2025 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Washim, rejecting his preliminary objection (Exhibit 10) regarding the maintainability of an application filed by the respondent, Ranjana Ashok Polkar, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The petitioner also sought quashing of the entire proceedings in PWDV No.16/2023. The respondent had filed the application alleging domestic violence, claiming a relationship in the nature of marriage. The petitioner contended that the parties were never married and had no domestic relationship; they only had a love affair which had ended. The petitioner pointed to various documents, including an FIR, charge-sheet, bail application, and election petition, where the respondent's name was consistently shown as 'Ranjana Polkar' or 'Ranjana Ashok Polkar', not as 'Ranjana Suresh Mapari' as styled in the complaint. The court examined the definition of 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act, which includes relationships in the nature of marriage. The court held that a mere love affair, without more, does not constitute a relationship in the nature of marriage. The agreement between the parties acknowledging a love affair that had ended was insufficient to establish a domestic relationship. Consequently, the respondent was not an 'aggrieved person' under the Act. The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and dismissed the proceedings in PWDV No.16/2023.
Headnote
A) Domestic Violence Act - Domestic Relationship - Section 2(f) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Maintainability - The court considered whether a love affair that ended constitutes a domestic relationship - Held that a mere love affair, without marriage or a relationship in the nature of marriage, does not fall within the definition of domestic relationship under Section 2(f) - The application under the Domestic Violence Act was not maintainable as there was no domestic relationship between the parties (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a mere love affair between parties, without marriage or a relationship in the nature of marriage, constitutes a 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, thereby making the application maintainable.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 21.05.2025 passed below Exhibit 10 in PWDV No.16/2023 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Washim, is quashed and set aside. The proceedings in PWDV No.16/2023 are quashed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Domestic relationship under Section 2(f) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- 2005 requires marriage or relationship in nature of marriage
- mere love affair insufficient
- maintainability of application under Domestic Violence Act depends on existence of domestic relationship
Case Details
Criminal Writ Petition No. 541 of 2025
Mr. A.M. Ghare for petitioner; Dr. Mohan S. Gawai a/w Mr. V.S. Wankhade for respondent
Suresh s/o Kahiram Mapari
Ranjana Ashok Polkar (styled as Ranjana Suresh Mapari in complaint)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging rejection of preliminary objection regarding maintainability of application under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and seeking quashing of proceedings.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of order dated 21.05.2025 rejecting Exhibit 10 and quashing of entire proceedings in PWDV No.16/2023.
Filing Reason
Petitioner contended that the application under Domestic Violence Act was not maintainable as there was no domestic relationship between the parties; they were never married and had only a love affair.
Previous Decisions
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Washim, rejected the petitioner's preliminary objection (Exhibit 10) on 21.05.2025.
Issues
Whether a mere love affair constitutes a 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Whether the application under the Domestic Violence Act was maintainable in the absence of a domestic relationship.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the parties were never married and had no relationship in the nature of marriage; the love affair had ended, and thus no domestic relationship existed.
Petitioner pointed to documents showing respondent's name as 'Ranjana Polkar' or 'Ranjana Ashok Polkar', not as 'Ranjana Suresh Mapari', indicating no marital relationship.
Respondent's application under Domestic Violence Act was based on an alleged relationship in the nature of marriage, but the court found insufficient evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
A mere love affair, without marriage or a relationship in the nature of marriage, does not constitute a 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Therefore, an application under the Act is not maintainable if the parties do not share a domestic relationship as defined.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 21.05.2025 passed below Exhibit 10 in PWDV No.16/2023, by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Washim, wherein the Exhibit 10 filed by the present petitioner, came to be rejected.
The application at Exhibit 10 was filed raising an objection on the ground that the application is not maintainable, as the petitioner and respondent are neither married nor have any relationship in the nature of marriage thereby having shared household.
He further submits that the agreement which was placed on record by the respondent, wherein it is stated that the petitioner and respondent had a love affair, which has come to an end, that by itself would not fall under the definition of domestic relationship, which is defined under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Procedural History
The respondent filed an application under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20, 22, and 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, being PWDV No.16/2023, before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Washim. The petitioner filed a preliminary objection (Exhibit 10) challenging maintainability on the ground of absence of domestic relationship. The Magistrate rejected the objection on 21.05.2025. The petitioner then filed the present Criminal Writ Petition No.541/2025 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the order and seeking quashing of proceedings.
Acts & Sections
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: 2(f), 12, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 161
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 376(2)(n), 417
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989: 3(2)(v)
