Point of Law: Application under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005, it appears that respondent No. 2 of this petition has claimed all reliefs she is legally entitled to under law equity and justice under Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

JUDGMENT :

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

1. By this application, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner No. 1-Shri Biraj Pal and petitioner No. 2-Ms. Pinky Paul prayed for striking off their names from the complaint in Domestic Violence Case No. DV-01/2020, pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karbi Anglong, Diphu, Assam under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

2. The factual background, leading to filing of this petition, is briefly stated as under:

“The respondent No. 2-Smti. Rumpi Das Paul filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, against Shri Bikash Paul, Shri Biraj Paul and Ms. Pinky Paul, who are respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, respectively, in the complaint petition, alleging inter-alia amongst others that she got married with respondent No. 1 of the said petition, namely, Shri Bikash Paul, as per rites and rituals of the society on 24.03.2013, and thereafter, lived together as husband and wife at Bengali Garay Gaon, under Haluati P.S. District Sibsagar and they were blessed with one baby boy on 19.06.2014. It is stated that after the marriage, her husband-Bikash Paul told her that he was not ready for marriage as he was having an affairs with his younger brother’s wife, namely, Ms. Pinky Paul, and that he married her because of his mother, and that after the marriage, her husband came to her in intoxicated state and did not have any physical relationship with her and the respondent No. 3 of the said petition, namely, Ms. Pinky Paul, who is the wife of respondent No. 2 of the said petition, namely, Biraj Paul, and who happens to be younger brother of the respondent No. 1 of the said petition, namely, Bikash Paul, treated her as a house maid and behaved with her as the owner of the said house and even while she asked for cosmetics, then the respondent No. 1-Bikash Paul used to give the same to the respondent No. 3-Pinky Paul and she use to collect the same from the respondent No. 3-Pinky Paul and respondent No. 3-Pinky Paul used to command her, and that her husband-respondent No. 1-Bikash Paul, used to slap her and once respondent No. 1-Bikash Paul poured hot dal on her person on account of the same being little bit salty and her husband tortured her while she was carrying pregnancy and she has seen respondent No. 1-Bikash Paul and respondent No. 3-Pinky Paul involving in physical relationship in kitchen and also in bathroom and reported the matter to respondent No. 2-Biraj Paul, the husband of respondent No. 3, but, he paid no attention to the same and the respondent No. 1-Bikash Paul had no bonding with her and he also snatched away her mobile phone and even did not allow her to talk with her parents and the respondent No. 3-Pinky Paul taunt her and also use to slap her in front of her husband-respondent No. 1-Bikash Paul and her brother-in-law, respondent No. 2-Biraj Paul and also doubt her for not bringing adequate dowry and thereafter on 10.07.2020, her husband driven her out from the matrimonial home while her father and elder sister came to her place.”

3. Being aggrieved, the present petitioners who are the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 of the complaint in domestic violence case, approached this Court for striking off their names from the array of the respondents, on the ground that the learned Court below has passed the order dated 24.09.2020, by taking cognizance and issued notice, without there being any specific statement or concrete evidence of torture by the petitioners upon the respondent No. 2 (complainant), which is illegal and not tenable in the eye of law and that before passing the order, the learned Court below did not consider the domestic incidents report received from the Protection Officer and without proper enquiry, passed the order dated 24.09.2020, and the learned Court below also failed to apply judicial mind and without receiving proper report as provided under Section 12 of the Domestic Violenc