Hemant Bhagat vs Prekshi Sood Bhagat - 2024 Supreme(P&H) 1566

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(P&H) 1566

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SHEEL NAGU, PANKAJ JAIN
Hemant Bhagat – Appellant
Versus
Prekshi Sood Bhagat – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Pankaj Midda, Advocate Mr. Kashav Chadha, Advocate for Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate Mr. R.M. Sharma, Advocate Mr. Ramnish Puri, Advocate Mr. Japjit Singh Johal, Advocate and Mr. Nitin Sachdeva, Advocate Mr. Deepak Negi, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Ms. Harmanpreet Kaur, Advocate Mr. Himanshu Arora, Panel Counsel for U.T. Chandigarh with Ms. Radhika Mehta, Advocate; Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. A.G., Haryana; Mr. Saurav Khurana, Addl.A.G., Punjab

JUDGMENT :

Pankaj Jain, J.

CR-3407-2024 is being taken as lead case. Shorn of details, brief facts that need to be noticed are that, complaint was filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for brevity, referred to as 'the Act of 2005') by respondent-wife against maternal uncle and aunt of her husband seeking protection order under Section 18, residence order under Section 19 and compensation order under Section 22 of the Act of 2005. Surprisingly, husband was not arraigned as a party in the complaint. Petitioners approached this Court seeking quashing of the complaint claiming that the same has been filed by respondent-wife in collusion with her husband and is a counter-blast to the complaint filed by petitioners No.l and 3 against husband of the complainant. The complaint is thus an abuse of process of law.

2. Instant revision petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It was claimed by counsel for the petitioners that petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashing of complaint filed under Section 12 of the Act of 2005, have been held to be not maintainable by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M No.19553 of