Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Hardeep Singh Arora, challenged an order dated 8th October 2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Belapur, in Criminal Complaint No. OMA/205/2015. The impugned order directed service of summons through the Immigration Authority of India and restrained the petitioner from leaving India without court permission. The petitioner is the husband of respondent No. 3, and they were married on 5th December 2002, having two minor children. The petitioner has been working in Singapore since May 2008, and the respondent No. 3 had joined him there but returned to India in 2011 due to matrimonial disputes. The respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) against the petitioner, his parents, and other family members, seeking protection, residence, and monetary relief. She also filed an application on 8th October 2015 stating that the petitioner visits India on the 2nd and 4th Saturdays of the month during morning hours and leaves on Sunday night, making it difficult to serve notice on him. The Magistrate, without issuing notice to the petitioner, ordered service through the Immigration Authority and restrained him from leaving India. The High Court held that such directions are not warranted at the stage of issuance of summons under Section 12 of the DV Act, as the Magistrate had not yet applied its mind to the complaint. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the Magistrate to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations made in the judgment.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Summons - Service through Immigration Authority - Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - The Magistrate ordered service of summons through Immigration Authority and restrained the petitioner from leaving India without court permission. The High Court held that such directions are not warranted at the stage of issuance of summons under Section 12 of the DV Act, as the Magistrate had not yet applied its mind to the complaint and no notice was issued to the petitioner. The order was set aside. (Paras 1-8)
B) Matrimonial Dispute - Domestic Violence - Interim Relief - Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - The respondent wife filed a complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act seeking protection, residence, and monetary relief. The High Court noted that the petitioner husband was working in Singapore and the wife had returned to India. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the Magistrate to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law. (Paras 2-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Magistrate was justified in ordering service of summons through the Immigration Authority and directing the Immigration Authority not to permit the Petitioner to leave India without permission of the Court, at the stage of issuance of summons under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned order dated 8th October 2015. The court directed the learned Magistrate to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations made in the judgment.
Law Points
- Summons through Immigration Authority
- Restraint on leaving India
- Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- 2005
- Stage of issuance of summons
- Matrimonial dispute
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (01) 52
WRIT PETITION NO.4695 OF 2017
Mr. Pradeep Chavan i/b. M/s. Pradeep Chavan and Associates for the Petitioner, Mrs. Ameeta Kuttikrishnan for the Respondent No.2, Mr. Sanskar Marathe i/b. Mr. H. & M. Legal for the Respondent No.3
The State of Maharashtra, Government of India (Immigration Authority), Mrs. Amardeep Hardeepsingh Arora
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging order of Judicial Magistrate directing service of summons through Immigration Authority and restraining petitioner from leaving India without court permission in a complaint under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of the order dated 8th October 2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Belapur, in Criminal Complaint No. OMA/205/2015.
Filing Reason
The petitioner challenged the order on the ground that the Magistrate had not issued notice to him before passing the impugned order and that the directions were not warranted at the stage of issuance of summons.
Previous Decisions
The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Belapur, passed the impugned order on 8th October 2015 in Criminal Complaint No. OMA/205/2015.
Issues
Whether the learned Magistrate was justified in ordering service of summons through the Immigration Authority and directing the Immigration Authority not to permit the Petitioner to leave India without permission of the Court, at the stage of issuance of summons under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed without issuing notice to him and that the directions were not warranted at the stage of issuance of summons under Section 12 of the DV Act.
The respondent No. 3 argued that the petitioner was evading service and that the directions were necessary to ensure his presence in the proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The issuance of summons through Immigration Authority and restraint on leaving India without court permission is not warranted at the stage of issuance of summons under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, as the Magistrate had not yet applied its mind to the complaint and no notice was issued to the petitioner.
Judgment Excerpts
The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 8th October, 2015 in Criminal Complaint No.OMA/205/2015 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Belapur, has ordered service of summons through the Immigration Authority of India and issued directions to the Immigration Authority not to permit the Petitioner herein to leave India without permission of the Court.
The impugned order is set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations made in this judgment.
Procedural History
The respondent No. 3 filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Belapur. On 8th October 2015, the Magistrate passed the impugned order directing service of summons through the Immigration Authority and restraining the petitioner from leaving India. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging that order. The High Court reserved judgment on 20th November 2017 and pronounced it on 12th January 2018.
Acts & Sections
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: 12
