ORDER

1. Applicants have filed present petition under section 482 of CrPC for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 627/2019 under section 12 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in short DV Act) pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore.

2. It is not disputed that the Pooja daughter of applicants No. 1 and 2 was married to the son of respondent on 7.12.2015. From their wedlock one daughter was born out. Presently Pooja is residing with the applicants No. 1 and 2 with her daughter. The applicants No. 3, 4 and 5 are the brother, brother in-law and sister of Pooja.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that respondent and her son ill-treated the Pooja on account of demand of dowry. After receiving the information regarding this, the applicant No. 1 and 2 approached Indore police for protection and with the help of police Pooja went back to the house of applicants No. 1 and 2. After reaching in her parental house situated Alwar (Rajasthan) Pooja made complaint against the respondent and her son at Mahila police Station Alwar regarding demand of dowry and harassment. After the intervention of police, Pooja went back to Indore but after sometime she was again thrown out from her matrimonial house. Thereafter, Pooja filed an application under section 125 of CrPC for getting maintenance from her husband. She again lodged police complaint against husband and his family members at Mahila Police Station Alwar. She also filed petition under section 12 of DV Act against them. Then to build pressure upon Pooja, the respondent has filed this case under section 12 of DV Act against the applicants, which is clear abuse pf process of law because the applicants never resided with the respondent, therefore, they are not covered under the definition of 'Domestic relationship'. Under these circumstances, no case is made out against them under the said Act, thus the trial Court has committed error in taking cognizance against the applicants for the aforesaid offence. Hence, learned counsel for the applicants prays for quashment of proceedings of Criminal Case No. 627/2019 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore against the applicant.

4. None is appeared on behalf of the respondent when the case was called for hearing.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record.

6. In the present petition, the respondent taking shelter of domestic relationship and domestic violence under the Domestic Violence Act. Domestic relationship is defined under the Act in section 2(f) as under:

"(f) "domestic relationship? means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family."

7. A perusal of this provision makes it clear that domestic relationship arises in respect of an aggrieved person if the aggrieved person had lived together with the respondent in a shared household. This living together can be either soon before filing of petition or "at any point of time". The problem arises with the meaning of phrase "at any point of time". Does that mean that living together at any stage in the past would give right to a person to become aggrieved person to claim domestic relationship. Thus, if the domestic relationship continued and if the parties have lived together at any point of time in a shared household, a person can be a respondent but if the relationship does not continue and the relationship had been in past and is not in present, a person cannot be made respondent on the ground of past relationship. The domestic relationship between the aggrieved person and the respondent must be present and alive at the time when complaint under Domestic Violence Act is filed and if this relationship is not alive on the date when complaint i