Domestic violence claims require specific allegations and evidence of a domestic relationship. Vague or false claims cannot sustain legal proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

JUDGMENT :

YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.

1. Heard Mr. K Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J.K Bhuyan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

2. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing and setting aside of the Domestic Violence case No. 76 of 2023 filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2005 for brevity), pending in the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M), Guwahati

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the marriage of petitioner no. 1 and the respondent No. 1 were solemnized on 09.05.2022 as per Hindu rituals and customs at Guwahati and it was agreed upon between the parties that as soon as the US Visa of the respondent No. 1 gets approved, the respondent 1 would fly to the U.S to live and reside with the petitioner No. 1.

4. After the said social marriage, the petitioner No. 1/husband applied for the U.S Visa, on behalf of the respondent No. 1. It is submitted that the Visa of the respondent No. 1 was issued on 02.03.2023. The Visa for the U.S was issued in Bangkok and at that point of time, the respondent No. 1 along with the parents of the petitioner No. 1 (petitioner No. 2 & 3) was at Bangkok. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the flight tickets of the parents of the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 1 which shows that the respondent No. 1, along with the parents of the petitioner No. 1, were in Bangkok from 27.02.2023 to 09.03.2023.

5. It is further stated that instead of travelling to the U.S, the respondent No. 1, along with the petitioner No. 2 and petitioner No. 3, returned to the matrimonial home at Silchar, Assam on 09.03.2023. Thereafter, the petitioners were under the expectation that the respondent No. 1 will travel to the U.S to reside with the petitioner No. 1. But, instead, the respondent No. 1 left the matrimonial home and went to reside with her parents in Guwahati.

6. Thereafter, the complaint under Section 12 of the Act of 2005 was filed before the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) against the petitioners on 09.05.2023 along with a Domestic Incident Report (DIR) dated 04.05.2023 prepared by the District Social Welfare Officer, Kamrup (M) and Protection Officer, Kamrup (M) and the same is now registered as D.V Case No. 76/2023 and pending before the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M), Guwahati. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No. 1 had never resided in a shared household at any point of time with the petitioner No. 1 in his residence in the U.S since their marriage. It is stated that the respondent No. 1 and the petitioner No. 1, though socially married, have in fact, never been in a domestic relationship since the date of their marriage. And therefore, the DV Case against the petitioners is misplaced and needs to be quashed and set aside. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that the respondent no. 1 has made only one allegation of physical violence against the petitioner No. 3 which allegedly happened on 04.03.2023 at Silchar. The same is also wrongly mentioned in the DIR which states that the domestic violence occurred on 04.03.2023. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that this report has also been made mechanically without any application of mind and that the respondent No. 1 has also made a false allegation in her petition before the Ld. Trial Court regardin