IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Mohd. Yousuf - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana & others – Respondents
W.P. No.2864 of 2024
Decided On : 30-09-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim of domestic violence is challenged. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. accusations against petitioner rejected; legal responses insufficient. (Para 6) |
| 3. statutory duties of authorities covered under dvc act. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. challenge to domestic violence proceedings based on jurisdiction. (Para 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction and maintainability. (Para 11 , 16) |
ORDER :
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Heard Sri B.Shyam Sundar Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Smt. J.Seetha, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
2. The petitioner approached the court seeking prayer as under :
“…to issue a Writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the proceedings in the DVC No.131/2022 on the file of Spl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate (Excise)-cum-Vth Addl MM Court, R.R. District at L.B.Nagar declaring the same to be without jurisdiction and illegal and the proceedings of the 2nd respondent forwarding the complaint of the 3rd respondent without any application of mind as being illegal and mechanical and declare the same to be illegal and pass such other order...”
3. The case of the petitioner as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present writ petition in brief, is as under:
(i) It is the case of the petitioner that, the 3rd respondent herein was married to the petitioner in the year 1995 where by the 3rd respondent had converted her religion into Muslim and the marriage was performed as per the rituals of Muslim religion. However, both the petitioner and the 3rd respondent had been living apart since 2016. Moreover, the 3rd respondent had been causing mental agony and harassing the petitioner herein by filing various cases against the petitioner.
(ii) While things stood thus, the 3rd respondent had submitted a complaint dated 01.11.2022 against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner had been inflicting domestic violence on the 3rd respondent. The said complaint was filed before the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent had registered a Domestic Incident report and forwarded the same to the Spl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate (Excise)-cum- Vth Addl. MM Court R.R District vide DVC No. 131/2022. However, the said domestic violence case is illegal.
(iii) It is the specific case of the petitioner that, since the petitioner and 3rd respondent had been living apart since 2016, the question of domestic violence does not arise. Therefore, the said domestic violence case is illegal and same must be quashed. Therefore, aggrieved by the said DVC No. 131/2022, the present Writ Petition is filed.
4. PERUSED THE RECORD.
5. The interim order dated 12.02.2024 passed in W.P.No.2864 of 2024, in favour of the petitioner which is in force as on date are extracted hereunder:
“ Notice before admission.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on the respondent No.3 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due and file proof of service in the Registry by the next date of hearing.
List on 14.03.2024.
There shall be interim stay as prayed for.”
6. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent, in particular, paragraph Nos.4 and 10 are extracted hereunder:
“4. In reply to Para Nos.4 to 8, under reply, I submit that the petitioner is making false and baseless allegations against me in the said paras. In fact, the petitioner started disturbing my professional life by interfering with the functioning of the schools and other institutions. The petitioner started sending legal notices to me by different ways with all false and baseless allegations by alleging that I am misusing the society funds and I am misguiding the charted accountant, etc., the entire allegations made against me are false, but with a malafide intention to harass me mentally making such allegations aga
The court ruled that domestic violence proceedings can be pursued despite separation if the aggrieved party alleges domestic violence, affirming that jurisdiction under the Domestic Violence Act is v....
The court determined that the maintainability of DVC proceedings must be assessed based on rigorous adherence to the provisions of the DVC Act, emphasizing the jurisdictional limits of the High Court....
Proceedings initiated under Section 12 seeking reliefs under Sections 18 to 23 are civil in nature – Proceedings under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. and other relevant provisions of Cr.P.C. are not to be fo....
(1) Relief sought for under Chapter IV of D.V. Act is not in nature of a formal accusation like in a criminal case and person against whom such a relief is sought for, is not an accused before Magist....
The court established that proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act cannot be quashed unless it is clear that no prima facie case exists and the allegations are malicious.
The Domestic Violence Act proceedings are civil in nature, and the proper procedure involves issuing notices rather than summons, emphasizing the distinction from criminal jurisdiction.
Proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act initiated with vague allegations and lacking material particulars constitute an abuse of process and are unsustainable in law.
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.