Case Note & Summary
The present criminal application was filed by two senior citizens, aged 73 and 67 years, seeking quashing of the process issued against them by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panvel, in M.A.No.385 of 2017, filed under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The respondent No.1 is the daughter-in-law of the applicants, having married their son on 14th April 2004. The applicants contended that they never approved of the marriage due to differences in caste and culture, and the couple always resided separately from them. The respondent never lived with the applicants in a shared household. The applicants argued that the complaint contained no specific allegations of domestic violence against them, and the issuance of process was an abuse of process. The court examined the application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act and found that the respondent had not made any allegations against the applicants. The court noted that the definition of 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) requires living together in a shared household, which was absent. The court held that continuing the proceedings against the applicants would be an abuse of process and quashed the proceedings against them. The court allowed the application and set aside the process issued against the applicants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of Process - Abuse of Process - The High Court can quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process of law when the allegations do not make out a prima facie case against the accused. (Para 6)
B) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 12 - Domestic Relationship - Shared Household - The term 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) requires living together in a shared household. If the aggrieved person never resided with the respondents in a shared household, no domestic relationship exists, and proceedings under the Act are not maintainable. (Paras 5-6)
C) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 12 - Quashing of Process - Parents-in-Law - Where the respondent-wife never lived with her parents-in-law and no specific allegations of domestic violence are made against them, the issuance of process against them is an abuse of process and liable to be quashed. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the process issued against the applicants, who are the parents-in-law of the respondent, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, can be quashed when the respondent never resided with them in a shared household and no specific allegations of domestic violence are made against them.
Final Decision
The court allowed the criminal application and quashed the proceedings in M.A.No.385 of 2017 against the applicants. The process issued against them was set aside.
Law Points
- Domestic Violence Act
- 2005
- Section 12
- Section 2(s)
- shared household
- domestic relationship
- quashing of process
- abuse of process of law
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (09) 60
Criminal Application No.208 of 2018
Ms. Sarah Kapadia i/b. Beerta Bajwa for the Applicants, Mrs. A.P. Madhuri a/w. Govind Solanki for Respondent No.1, Ms. S.D. Shinde, APP for the Respondent State
B. Balachandra Rao & Anr.
Ms. Sanjna Navneet Rao & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application for quashing of process issued under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the proceedings in M.A.No.385 of 2017 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panvel, against the applicants.
Filing Reason
The applicants, being senior citizens and parents-in-law of the respondent, contended that no allegations of domestic violence were made against them and they never shared a household with the respondent, making the process an abuse of law.
Previous Decisions
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panvel, issued process against the applicants in M.A.No.385 of 2017.
Issues
Whether the process issued against the applicants under the Domestic Violence Act can be quashed when the respondent never resided with them in a shared household?
Whether the absence of specific allegations against the applicants in the complaint warrants quashing of proceedings?
Submissions/Arguments
The applicants' counsel argued that the respondent never lived with the applicants and no allegations were made against them, making the process an abuse of process.
The respondent's counsel opposed the application, but the court found no specific allegations against the applicants.
Ratio Decidendi
Under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, a 'domestic relationship' requires living together in a shared household. If the aggrieved person never resided with the respondents, no domestic relationship exists, and proceedings against them are not maintainable. Issuance of process without specific allegations amounts to abuse of process and is liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Judgment Excerpts
The present Criminal Application is filed by the two applicants, who are senior citizens, aged about 73 years and 67 years of age.
Perusal of the application filed under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is filed by Respondent No.1, who is the daughter-in-law of the applicants would reveal that Respondent No.1 is married with the son of applicants on 14th April 2004...
The application, therefore, seeks quashment of the proceedings instituted in M.A.No.385 of 2017 against the present applicants...
Procedural History
The respondent filed an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panvel, being M.A.No.385 of 2017. The Magistrate issued process against the applicants. The applicants then filed the present criminal application under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court seeking quashing of the process.
Acts & Sections
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: Section 12, Section 2(f), Section 2(s)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 482
