DELHI HIGH COURT
Anu Malhotra, J.
Dharma Rohilla and Ors. —Petitioners
versus
Saroj —Respondent
Crl.M.C. No.509 of 2019 and Crl.M.A. No.2172 of 2019 (Stay)
Decided on 12.6.2020

IMPORTANT POINT
At the stage of summoning of accused, Court cannot undertake detailed appreciation of evidence on record.

Headnote:

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Section 12 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 read with Article 227 of Constitution of India – Domestic violence – Respondent has submitted that issuance of summons by Magistrate ought not be interdicted at this stage as the same have been issued on a prima facie view and that at stage of summoning, Magistrate was not required to evaluate material or evidence minutely in support of complaint – Complainant has mentioned specific incidents when she was subjected to physical violence by respondents – Complainant is entitled to interim relief at this stage – Observations of Revisional Court observing to the effect that summoning of petitioners by Trial Court suffers from no infirmity, cannot be faulted with – Petition dismissed.

Held: Furthermore, the respondent has submitted that the issuance of summons by the Magistrate ought not be interdicted at this stage as the same have been issued on a prima facie view and that at the stage of summoning, the Magistrate was not required to evaluate the material or evidence minutely in support of the complaint because the Magistrate at that stage does not undertake an exercise to find out whether the materials would suffice for a conviction or not.

This Court has considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material on record. The present petition has been filed against the father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law. In the petition, the complainant has stated that after the marriage she went to Hyderabad with her husband where they lived for about two years and thereafter, they returned to matrimonial house at Palam Colony on 16.12.2016 and since then, they have been living there. The respondents and their tenants had given beatings to the complainant and her husband on 22.11.2017 and the complainant has made police complaint. She has alleged that since the day she had come to the matrimonial house, all the respondents have been quarreling with her and they have been physically and mentally harassing her. The respondents in their reply have stated that the second floor property where the complainant is living was not shared household and there was no valid marriage between the complainant and elder son of the respondent no.1 and 2. In the reply, they have denied the allegations made by the complainant.

The respondents have contended that there is no domestic relationship between the parties. It is a matter of record that the respondents had challenged the summoning order passed by this Court on the ground that there is no domestic relationship and the revision filed by the respondents had been dismissed by the Ld.ASJ vide order dated 11.12.2018. The respondents had filed appeal before Hon’ble High Court of Delhi and the appeal is pending. There is no stay on the present proceedings by the order of Hon’ble High Court. The record would show that the complainant has specifically stated about the incident when she was physically assaulted by the respondents. It is also clear from the reply of the respondents that the complainant is living on the second floor of the property bearing No. RZF-946, Raj Nagar, Palam Colony near Heera Devi Model Public School, New Delhi.

The complainant has mentioned specific incidents when she was subjected to physical violence by the respondents. Therefore, this Court is of the view that complainant is entitled to interim relief at this stage. The issue whether there has been domestic relationship between the complainant and the respondents is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble High Court. The judgment relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the respondents is not applicable to the case in hand because the issue of domestic relationship is still pending before the Hon’ble High Court.

In view of the fact that the complainant has made specific allegations of harassment against the respondents, this Court is of the view that the complainant is entitled to interim protection. Therefore, protection order is granted in favour of the complainant and the respondents are retrained from committing and physical violence upon the complainant and they are also restrained from forcibly dispossessing the complainant from property no.RZF-946 Raj Nagar II, Palam Colony, IInd Floor, near Heera Devi Model Public School, New Delhi without following due process of law. The application of the complainant for interim relief is accordingly disposed of. Copy of order be given dasti to both parties and be also sent to the SHO concerned for necessary action/compliance.

Be put up for C.E. on 25.10.2019.

Copy of evidence by way of affidavit be supplied one week in advance before NDOH.”, and vide the said order, it has been observed to the effect that the complainant i.e. the respondent herein had made specific allegations of harassment against the respondents therein and that she was thus entitled to interim protection and a protection order was thus granted in her favour and the petitioners herein were restrained from committing any physical violence on her and were also restrained from forcibly dispossessing her from property no. RZ F946, Raj Nagar-II, Palam Colony, Near Heera Devi Model Public School, New Delhi 110077 without following the due process of law, which is the order dated 03.07.2019 which is under challenge in CA 323/2019 before the learned ASJ concerned, which is now stated to be listed for the date 15.06.2020 and vide order dated 24.02.2020, it has been observed by the learned ASJ-02, District South West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in CA 323/2019.

Apparently, in these circumstances, the observations of the Revisional Court observing to the effect that the summoning of the petitioners herein by the Trial Court vide order dated 12.09.2018 in CC No.26903/2018 suffers from no infirmity, cannot be faulted with

Thus, this Court does not consider its appropriate to exercise discretionary powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere in the said impugned order dated 11.12.2018 of the Revisional Court. (Paras 15, 25, 28 and 29)

Result: Petition dismissed.