Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Mr. Prabhakar Mohite and Mrs. Vijaya Prabhakar Mohite, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the issuance of process against them in proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act). The respondent No.2, Archana Nilesh Shinde, is the wife of the nephew of petitioner No.2. The marriage between respondent No.2 and the nephew was solemnized on 07.07.2007. On 15.03.2013, respondent No.2 filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Panvel, alleging marital discord, dowry harassment, and instances of irretrievable breakdown of relationship. The application was filed against her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, and the present petitioners. The petitioners contended that they are not 'respondents' under the DV Act as they are not in a 'domestic relationship' with the aggrieved person as defined under Section 2(f) of the Act. The court examined the definitions under the DV Act, particularly Section 2(f) which defines 'domestic relationship' as a relationship between two persons who live or have lived together in a shared household, and are related by consanguinity, marriage, or a relationship in the nature of marriage, or are family members living together as a joint family. The court noted that the petitioners are the aunt and uncle of the husband, and there is no allegation that they lived in the shared household with the respondent No.2. The court held that the relationship of aunt by marriage does not fall within the definition of 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) of the DV Act. The court further observed that the complaint did not contain any specific allegations of domestic violence against the petitioners. Relying on the principle that the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process, the court quashed the proceedings against the petitioners. The court allowed the writ petition and set aside the process issued against the petitioners.
Headnote
A) Domestic Violence Act - Definition of 'Respondent' - Section 2(q) read with Section 2(f) - The term 'respondent' under the DV Act includes any adult male person who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person. The definition of 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) includes relationships by consanguinity, marriage, or a relationship in the nature of marriage, and includes persons living in a shared household. An aunt by marriage does not fall within any of these categories. Held that the petitioners, being the aunt and uncle of the husband, are not 'respondents' under the Act and the process against them is liable to be quashed. (Paras 1-16) B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent Powers - Quashing of Proceedings - The High Court can exercise its inherent powers to quash proceedings where the allegations do not disclose any offence or where the process is an abuse of process of court. In the present case, the complaint against the petitioners did not make any specific allegations of domestic violence against them, and they were not living in the shared household. Held that the continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process, and the proceedings against the petitioners are quashed. (Paras 14-16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners, being the aunt and uncle of the husband of the respondent No.2, can be considered as 'respondents' under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and whether the issuance of process against them is sustainable.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The proceedings against the petitioners in DV/MA/122/2013 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Panvel, are quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute.
Law Points
- Domestic relationship under Section 2(f) of the DV Act requires relationship by consanguinity
- marriage
- or a relationship in the nature of marriage
- or living in a shared household
- aunt by marriage is not covered
- relatives of husband not automatically included unless they fall within the definition
- process against such relatives is liable to be quashed.
