MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

Madras HC: False DV opposite relatives of NRI father quashed.


DATED: 12.10.2017


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

Senthil Kumar …Petitioners


S.Shobana …Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed underneath Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to call for a annals in D.V.Act No.16 of 2017 on a record of a schooled Judicial Magistrate Sulur and stifle a same as illegal.

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

This petition is filed seeking to call for a annals in D.V.A No.16 of 2017 on a record of a schooled Judicial Magistrate Sulur and stifle a same as illegal.

  1. Heard a schooled warn for a petitioners as good as a schooled Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on interest of a respondent.
  2. The petitioners herein are a Father-in-law, Mother-in-law and Brother-in-law of a respondent. The schooled warn for a petitioners submitted that shortly after a respondent had got married, she had changed divided to Abu Dhabi, where she set adult her matrimonial home and was vital with her husband. The petitioners herein had no indicate of time to live in a respondent’s matrimonial home.
  3. It is represented that a benefaction record underneath a Domestic Violence Act has been instituted as opposite a father as good as a petitioners, who are a respondent’s in-laws. Even from a averments done in a pronounced complaint, it is seen that a petitioners herein had never share chateau with a respondent and her husband. Therefore a petitioners did not have a domestic attribute with a respondent herein as tangible underneath Section 2F of a Domestic Violence Act. While that being so, it would inapt to assent a record as opposite a in-laws to continue.
  4. It is serve seen from a extensive reading of a complaint, a categorical protest of a respondent is as opposite her husband. If that being a case, a control of a respondent herein in implicating her in-laws would usually be termed as an try to mutilate reprisal opposite her family members. we do not find any reason, as to because a petitioners should bear a hearing in a record underneath a Domestic Violence Act.
  5. In a result, a Criminal strange petition is authorised and a record in D.V.A. No.16 of 2017 on a record of a schooled Judicial Magistrate, Sulur, in so distant as these petitions are endangered is quashed. Consequently, connected diverse petitions are closed.
See also  Whether permission to adduce secondary evidence amounts to proof of that document?

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 Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Important SC/HC Judgements on 498A IPC
Rules and Regulations of India.


CopyRight @ MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, though No Lawyer will give we Advice like We do

Please review Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You determine afterwards Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We hoop Women Centric inequitable laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

See also  Whether police station officer can refuse to investigate an offence u/s 498A of IPC on the ground of territorial jurisdiction?
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation