JUDGMENT :

1. In this criminal application, challenge is to the order dated 21.10.2022 below Exh.13 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur whereby, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the application at Exh. 13 made by the applicant for dismissal of the proceedings initiated by the non-applicant/complainant as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short “ the D.V. Act).

2. The facts are as follows:-

The applicant is the respondent in the complaint filed before the Magistrate. The non-applicant is the complainant. In this judgment they would be referred by their nomenclature in the complaint. The complainant and the respondent No.1 got married in the year 2020. The respondent No.1 on 12.12.2020 left for Germany. After getting the visa, the complainant also joined the respondent No.1. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 in the complaint are the in-laws of the complainant. According to the complainant, during her stay with the in-laws in the matrimonial home at Mumbai they used to make nasty, humiliating and insulting comments over the complainant and her parents. According to them, marriage was not performed as per their expectation and befitting their status. It is stated that in Germany the respondent No.1 for few days behaved properly with her. However, lateron the respondent No.1 subjected her to mental and physical torture. She was not allowed to talk with her parents. She was forced to do extra household work. The complainant was forced to undergo the abortion against her wish. The complainant suffered mental and physical torture. The respondent No.1 ultimately forced the complainant to leave Germany. The complainant therefore, came to Nagpur under a lot of physical and mental stress and trauma. She has been residing with her parents. After coming to Nagpur she filed the complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

3. The respondent No.1 filed his written statement/reply and opposed the application. The respondent No.1 made the application for dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the alleged acts of domestic violence have taken place in Germany and not within the extent of the provisions of the D.V. Act. According to him the Court in India has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint of the complainant.

4. The complainant filed the reply and opposed this application. According to her, the mental stress and trauma carried by her from Germany continued in India. She has suffered mental pain and agony. According to her, as per the provisions of Section 27 of the D.V. Act the Court of Magistrate at Nagpur is having the jurisdiction.

5. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the application made by the respondent No.1 holding that the issue raised by the respondent No.1 has been fully addressed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rupali Devi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in AIR 2019 SC 1790. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate further observed that the mental trauma and physical distress caused by the acts of the husband which ultimately compelled her to leave matrimonial home and take a shelter with her parents would continue to persist at the parental home. Against this order, the respondent No.1 is before this Court.

6. I have heard Mrs. Jyoti Dharmadhikari, learned Advocate for the applicant and Shri A.K. Mishra, learned Advocate for the non-applicant/complainant. Perused the record and proceedings.

7. The learned Advocate for the respondent No.1 submitted that the decision in the case of Rupali Devi Vs. State of Uttar Predesh (supra) is not at all applicable to the facts of this case and as such, the reliance placed on this decision by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate was totally misplaced. Learned Advocate pointed out that the alleged domestic violence according to the complaint, was caused while she was residing with the respondent No.1 in