ARUN KUMAR, J.:–Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Despite adjournment for appearance of opposite party no.2, none appeared on her behalf even today.

2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the entire proceeding against the petitioner in Domestic Violence Case No.68 of 2013 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna.

3. A brief fact giving rise to the case is that opposite party no.2 filed Domestic Violence Case No.68 of 2013 in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna alleging therein that she was married to one Pankaj Kumar Rastogi, a Software Engineer employed in Tech Mahindra and presently posted at Sunburry, London, U.K. in the year 2010 and she started living with her husband in London. The petitioner, respondent no.17 in the complaint, a co-employee of her husband in the same organization, also used to live in the same house. Husband used to spent all money upon the petitioner and they were in live-in relationship and illicit relationship caused mental torture and agony to the complainant, they hatched up a conspiracy and sent back the complainant to India on the pretext of pursuing higher education

Click Here to Read the rest of this document