JUDGMENT:

1. This petition involves an important question of law pertaining to the liability of a daughter in law, her father and brother in an action initiated against them by her mother in law under the provisions of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (“DV Act”).

2. The Petitioners seek quashing of DV Application No.40 of 2018, initiated by the Respondent No.2 against them under the provisions of the DV Act, and consequently, setting aside order dated 10th January 2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Koregaon, Satara, directing issuance of summons to the Petitioners.

3. By order dated 19th March 2019, notice was directed to be issued to the Respondent No.2 returnable on 5th April 2019 and private service was allowed. Notice was again issued by order dated 20th June 2019 by this Court to the Respondent No.2. The Petitioners have served the Respondent No.2 by private service and an affidavit of service along with the receipt of private service has been placed on record. Despite, receipt of notice, the Respondent No.2 has failed to appear before the Court and hence, the matter is taken up for hearing ex-parte.

4. The Petitioner No.1, Zeba is the daughter-in-law of the Respondent No.2, Afrin. The Petitioners No.2 and 3 are the father and brother respectively of the Petitioner No.1. The facts giving rise to the proceedings are that Zeba married Mohsin, son of Afrin in May 2016. According to Zeba, she was subjected to tremendous amount of ill-treatment and cruelty at the hands of her husband and his family members. She was therefore, compelled to lodge a complaint dated 29th December 2017 against Mohsin and his family members with the police authorities concerned. FIR No.00/18 was thus registered, after much persuasion under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and thereafter transferred from Palghar PS to Pune PS. In February 2018, the Petitioner No.1 also filed an application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”) in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, (“JMFC”) Vasai, Palghar seeking maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month from her husband. Complaining of domestic violence in her matrimonial home, she also made an application under the DV Act against her husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law and the brother of her mother-in-law. Pending these proceedings, the Respondent No.2, Afrin filed the application/complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act against Zeba, her father and brother seeking reliefs under Sections 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the DV Act in the JMFC Court, Koregaon, Satara. The JMFC issued summons dated 28th August 2018 and 21st November 2018. It is the maintainability of this complaint and the summons issued thereon by the JMFC court, that is assailed by the Petitioners in the present petition.

5. Mr. Sushil Upadhyay, learned counsel appears for the Petitioners and Mr. Jayesh Yagnik, Additional Public Prosecutor appears for the State. It is the contention of Mr. Upadhyay that the mother-in-law of Zeba, ie., Afrin has initiated the proceedings under the DV Act against the Petitioners only as a counter-blast to the proceedings for maintenance and domestic violence initiated by Zeba as well as the registration of FIR. He says that the complaint is totally untenable and there was never any shared household of the parties. Mr. Upadhyay challenges the DV proceedings on the ground that firstly, the proceeding is initiated only as a counter-blast to the proceedings filed by Zeba herself against her husband and his family members including the Respondent No.2 herein; secondly, the DV proceedings under challenge is a direct attempt to interfere in the grant of justice to the Petitioners amounting to ‘Contempt of Court’ and thirdly and most importantly the proceedings are not maintainable under the DV Act as none of the Petitioners fit within the category of a person against whom such proceedings can be filed. On these grounds