MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (GWALIOR BENCH)
B. M. GUPTA, J.
Ajay Kant and Ors.
Versus
Smt. Alka Sharma.
Misc. Crl. C. No. 1266 of 2007
Decided on : 19-6-2007.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act - Application under Section 12 - Act Sections 2(q), 18, 19, 21, 27, 28, 31, 32, 33 - The court discussed the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, including the definition of 'respondent', the powers of the Magistrate to pass protection orders, the penalties for breach of protection orders, and the appointment and duties of the Protection Officer. The court emphasized the civil and criminal nature of the proceedings under the Act and the rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution to provide a remedy under civil law to protect women from domestic violence.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the petitioners, alleging harassment and domestic violence. The learned Magistrate issued notices to the petitioners based on the application.
Finding of the Court:
The court partly allowed the petition, quashing the proceeding against petitioners No. 3 and 4, and directed the learned Magistrate to deal with the application as provided under the various provisions of the Act.
Issues: The issues included the maintainability of the application against female petitioners, the recording of the respondent's statement, the requirement of a report from the Protection Officer, and the relief of penalizing the petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the civil and criminal nature of the proceedings under the Act, the definition of 'respondent', and the rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution to provide a remedy under civil law to protect women from domestic violence.
Final Decision: The petition was partly allowed, quashing the proceeding against petitioners No. 3 and 4, and directing the learned Magistrate to deal with the application as provided under the various provisions of the Act.
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent Smt. Alka Sharma has filed one application under Section 12 of the Act against the petitioners. On which the learned Magistrate, vide order dated 18th January, 2007, has issued notices to the petitioners. It has been averred in the application that the respondent was married with petitioner No. 1 on 16th of May, 2005 at Gwalior. For a period of 4-6 months she became pregnant and thereafter the petitioners started harassing the respondent demanding Rs. 2 lacs and one Maruti car from her parents. As the father of the respondent is a pensioner, he could not fulfill the demand. He reported the matter to Mahila Police Station at Padav, Gwalior on 2nd November, 2005 but the report was not lodged and no action was taken.
On 3rd February, 2006 the respondent delivered a male child in the hospital. Thereafter, on 17th February, 2006 the petitioners separated the child from the respondent, kept him along with them and deserted the respondent. Consequently, since 20th February, 2006 she is living in her matrimonial home without her son. Petitioners are trying to declare the respondent as mentally sick and to remarry the petitioner No. 1. Admittedly, one application for divorce has been filed by the petitioner No. 1 against the respondent and the respondent has filed an application under Section 125 of Cr. P.C. claiming maintenance from him and also she has filed another application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for seeking a decree of restitution of conjugal rights against the petitioner No. 1. These applications are pending in the Family Court, Gwalior. On these grounds, the respondent has prayed in the application for taking legal action against the petitioners and also to punish them.
3. The aforementioned act of filing of the application by the respondent and issuance of notice by the Court against the petitioners has been assailed by the petitioners on various grounds. The grounds and decisions thereon are as under :-
3(A). That, the respondent was mentally sick before the marriage which was not disclosed by the respondent. On this ground, application for divorce has been filed by petitioner No. 1 on 15-5-2006 in which proceedings for reconciliation have been failed on 21-9-2006. Only for creating pressure against the petitioner No. 1, the present application has been filed on false grounds by the respondent on 23-11-2006.
3(B). That, in the application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent these facts have not been mentioned by her that on demand of Rs. 2 lacs and one Maruti car, she has been harassed by the petitioners and as such the application being on false grounds, proceedings based on it ought to be quashed.
The grounds in the application are false or not, this fact cannot be decided by this Court during this summary proceeding under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. The truthfulness or otherwise of the facts mentioned in the application can be decided by the learned Magistrate after due inquiry under the procedure as prescribed by the Act. Hence, the proceeding based on the application cannot be quashed by this Court at this stage on these two grounds.
3(C). That, as provided by Section 2(q) of the Act, such application under Section 12 of the Act cannot be filed against the petitioners No. 3 and 4 who are the ladies. In Section 2(q) of the Act the term respondent has been defined as under :-
(q) "respondent" means any adult male person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person and against whom the aggrieved person has sought any relief under
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.