SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(P&H) 1314

SABINA
Girish – Appellant
Versus
Poonam – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioners:Ms. Geeta Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr.Dinesh Arora, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mrs. Sabina, J.: - Petitioners have preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of criminal complaint along with Form-I under Section 12 of the protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short the Act) (Annexure P-6) as well as notice issued under Section 12 of the Act and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners were not residing in the matrimonial home of the respondent. Hence, the petitioners could not be prosecuted qua commission of offence punishable under the Act.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, has opposed the petition but has failed to controvert the factual aspect of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner to the effect that the petitioners were not residing in the matrimonial home of the respondent.

4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves to be allowed.

5. Respondent has filed the complaint under the Act. Admittedly, petitioners are not residing in the matrimonial home of the respondent. Petitioner No.1 Girish









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top