Madras HC: False DV against parents of NRI husband quashed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12.10.2017

CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

Crl.O.P.No.19213 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos. 11654 11655 of 2017

P.Karunambikai
Palanisamy
Senthil Kumar …Petitioners

Vs.

S.Shobana …Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records in D.V.Act No.16 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Sulur and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Namo Narayanan
For Respondent : Mr.P.Govindarajan
Additional Public Prosecutor.

ORDER
This petition is filed seeking to call for the records in D.V.A No.16 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Sulur and quash the same as illegal.

  1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.
  2. The petitioners herein are the Father-in-law, Mother-in-law and Brother-in-law of the respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that soon after the respondent had got married, she had moved away to Abu Dhabi, where she set up her matrimonial home and was living with her husband. The petitioners herein had no point of time to live in the respondent’s matrimonial home.
  3. It is represented that the present proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act has been initiated as against the husband as well as the petitioners, who are the respondent’s in-laws. Even from the averments made in the said complaint, it is seen that the petitioners herein had never share residence with the respondent and her husband. Therefore the petitioners did not have the domestic relationship with the respondent herein as defined under Section 2F of the Domestic Violence Act. While that being so, it would inappropriate to permit the proceedings as against the in-laws to continue.
  4. It is further seen from the comprehensive reading of the complaint, the main grievance of the respondent is as against her husband. If that being the case, the conduct of the respondent herein in implicating her in-laws would only be termed as an attempt to wreck vengeance against her family members. I do not find any reason, as to why the petitioners should undergo the trial in the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act.
  5. In the result, the Criminal original petition is allowed and the proceedings in D.V.A. No.16 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sulur, in so far as these petitions are concerned is quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
READ  Is it mandatory to register arbitration award if property more than Rs 100/ is transferred by said award?

12.10.2017 Index:Yes/No rts/msvm To The Presiding Officer, The Judicial Magistrate, Sulur M.S.RAMESH.J, rts Crl.O.P.No.19213 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos. 11654 11655 of 2017 12.10.2017

 

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *