Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
Vishnu Verma and Others - Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Another - Respondents
Application U/S 482 No. 7996 of 2010
Decided On : 31-01-2019
Domestic Violence - Protection of Women - The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Section 12
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute between a husband and wife, with the wife filing a complaint under Section 12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The husband sought to quash the proceedings citing that the alleged incidents occurred before the enforcement of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Act was maintainable even if the acts of domestic violence had been committed prior to the Act coming into force, based on the interpretation of the Act and relevant legal precedents.
Issues: The main issue was whether the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Act was applicable to incidents that occurred before the Act came into force.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment in V.D.Bhanot Vs. Savita Bhanot, (2012) 3 SCC 183, which held that a petition under the provisions of the Act is maintainable even if the acts of domestic violence had been committed prior to the Act coming into force.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings, stating that the grounds raised by the applicants were not tenable.
ORDER :
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.
1. None appears to press the present application even in the revised call. Counsel for the respondent no.2 also remained absent.
2. Learned Additional Government Advocate is present for the State.
3. The application is of the year 2010, and the issue involved in the present case is on law point, therefore, I proceed to decide the application as keeping the application pending would be against the interest of justice.
4. I have heard the Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
5. Applicants have filed the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings of Complaint Case No.712 of 2008 under Section 12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, P.S. Tajganj, District-Agra.
6. From the records it reveals that applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2 were married on 14.2.2004. In marriage adequate gifts were given by the bride side. There were dispute among the husband and wife. It has been alleged that on 17.8.2005 the opposite party no.2 was forced to leave her matrimonial house and thereafter she was not allowed to come back. On the other hand, applicant No.1 alleged that she left on her own will and never returned.
7. Applicant no.1 had filed Case No.295 of 2006 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of his conjugal rights before Family Court, Agra on 12.4.2006.
8. The Opposite Party No.2 lodged F.I.R. against the applicants on 20.5.2006 under Sections 498A, 323 and 506 I.P.C. at Police Station-Tajganj, District-Agra.
9. The Opposite Party No.2 filed Complaint Case No.712 of 2008 under Section 12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005, (hereinafter called the “Act of 2005”) before the Learned Judicial Magistrate IInd, Agra on 17.7.2008 seeking following reliefs.
¼ch½ /kkjk 19 ds v/khu ÁkFkhZ;k dks foi{k dh fLFkfr ds vuq:i oSdfYid vkokl lqfo/kk vFkok fdjk;s dk edku ;k fdjk;s ij edku ysus gsrq 5000@& #i;k Áfrekg nsus gsrw vknsf'kr djusA
¼lh½ ÁkFkhZ;k dh fpfdRlk lqfo/kk gsrq eqofyx 1200@& #i;k ekgokj vFkok vU; dksbZ vkns'k rF;ksa ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa ds n`f"Vxr ikfjr fd;k tkuk U;k; fgr es vko';d gSA
vr% Jheku th ls fuosnu gS fd ÁkFkhZ;k }kjk ÁLrqr ÁkFkZuk i= dks Lohdkj djrs gq;s /kkjk 18] 19] 20] o 21 ds v/khu vkns'k ikfjr djus vFkok vU; dksbZ vkns'k ftls ekuuh; U;k;ky; ifjfLFkfr;ksa ds n`f"Vxr mfpr le>s ikfjr djus dh d`ik djsA**
10. The learned Trial Court vide order dated 17.7.2008, issued notices only to male persons and not against females of the family. Report was also called from the Probation Officer.
11. Probation Officer, after investigation submitted his report on 9.3.2009 where offences under Act of 2005 were found to be true.
12. Meanwhile, opposite party challenged the order dated 17.7.2008 whereby notices were issued only to male persons and females of the family were left out, in Criminal Revision No.236 of 2008, before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Room No.4) Agra. The said revision was allowed vide order dated 20.10.2008 and directed that proceedings shall be under taken even against the female members also.
13. Consequently, notices were issued against the female applicants also on 26.6.2009.
14. All the applicants have approached this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
15. The applicants have raised following grounds in the application for quashing of entire proceedings under Section 12 of the Act 2005.
“The real story of the case is this, that the respondent no.2 who was married to the applicant no.1 and the marriage was solemnized without any dowry and respondent no.2 a
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
