ORDER

1. The petitioners have filed the present criminal revision under section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the order dated 29.9.2020 passed by 4th ASJ, Dhar in CRA No.79/2019 whereby the order dated 25.4.2019 passed by JMFC, Dhar whereby the learned trial Court has taken cognizance against the petitioner under the provisions of section of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 has been affirmed. Hence, the present revision before this Court.

2. Facts of the case are that respondent No.1/wife was married with brother of the petitioners namely Rajkumar on 30.4.2006 in accordance with Hindu Customs and Rights. Thereafter, in the year 2007, Gouna was conducted by the parents of both the parties. As per the complainant/wife, for a period of one year, they keep the complainant well and thereafter, they have harassed for not giving birth to a male child and demanded Rs.5 Lacs. She further alleged that she has made a complaint earlier also as per the direction of the Court she started living with her in-laws and they abused her and demanded dowry at that time, articles of 1.5 lacs were given and an horse in dowry. In the year 2009, she gave birth to a girl child namely Aasha and in the year 2015 she gave birth to a son namely Akshat. After giving birth to a female child in the year 2009, the family members of the petitioners have harassed her and then she lodged an FIR which was registered bearing Crime No.97/2009. Respondent no.1 filed a complaint under the domestic violence against the present petitioner. The petitioners are sisters-in-law of respondent and respondent No.1 filed the complaint due to cruelty, harassment on behalf of respondents including the petitioner. Hence, the present petition before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Court below has failed to consider that respondent no.1 had no domestic relationship with the present petitioners and the petitioners are sisters-inlaw of respondent. Respondent No.1 has deceitfully attempted to make false story under domestic violence against the petitioners whereas the petitioners having no concerned with the day to day affair of family of the respondent. Petitioner No.1 is living at Shujalpur district Shajapur and petitioner No.2 is living at Village Dedla which is far way from their maternal home. Both the petitioners have got married even prior to the marriage of respondent with their brother. The learned Court below has taken the cognizance without considering the facts and circumstances of the case which is against the law. The Cognizance of the case seems to have been taken without application of mind by the learned trial Court. Hence, the learned trial Court has failed to consider the aspect of the matter and taken the cognizance contrary to the settled proportions of law and continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of Court and the same is therefore liable to be quashed.

4. Counsel for respondent has opposed the prayer and supported the cognizance taken by the learned Court below. It is also submitted that soon after the marriage of the complainant, family members of the husband of respondent including the present petitioners have committed domestic violence upon the case. Hence, at the this stage, no case for interference is made out and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance over the judgment of apex Court passed in the case of Shyamlal Devda and Others v. Parimala [(2020) 3 SCC 14] and Ashish Dixit and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another [(2013) 4 SCC 176] wherein the Hon'ble apex Court has held that except the husband and parents-in-law, the respondent wife should not have been allowed impleadment of sundry persons.

6. Counsel for the petitioners further placed reliance over the judgments passed in the case of Neelu Chopra & Anr. v. Bharti 2009 (supp_CR.L>R. (SC) 765, Meenakshi Jatav (smt.) v. Dr. Smt Seema Sehar [2013(1)