ORDER:

The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 has been filed by the Petitioner/Respondent No.1 seeking quashment of proceedings against him in D.V.C.No.21 of 2020 on the file of the Court of VII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

for short ‘Cr.P.C’

2. Petitioner herein is the husband of Respondent No.1 and father of Respondent No.2 herein.

3. The facts leading to filing of the petition, in brief, are as follows:

a. The wife and child of the Petitioner herein filed an application under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 alleging that the marriage between Petitioner and Respondent No.1 herein took place on 02.12.2009 and out of wedlock, they were blessed with Respondent No.2 herein on 11.09.2010. As per the demands made by the husband and his family members, her parents presented dowry apart from observing all other formalities to meet their demands. The wife was subjected to physical and mental cruelty as the husband used to abuse her in filthy language and neglected her.The parents of the Petitioner also supported the Petitioner to harass Respondent No.1 herein both mentally and physically.

b. It is also stated that the Petitioner herein used to spend entire salary for his vices, come house in drunken condition and used to ill-treat Respondent No.1 herein. Petitioner herein did not even provide provisions in the house. Respondent No.1 herein left for her parents’ house for delivery along with her parents on 10.07.2010 and since then she has been staying there.

c. Petitioner herein did not choose to take back the wife to the matrimonial fold since she has given birth to a female child stating that she is an additional burden to the family. Respondent No.1 filed F.C.O.P.No.987 of 2015 on the file of the Court of Additional Family Judge, Visakhapatnam seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Petitioner herein did not comply with the Order of the Court to take back the wife to the matrimonial home.

d. Petitioner herein is working as a Senior Clerk in Visakhpatnam Port Trust and drawing Rs.80,000/- per month, but left the wife and child without providing any maintenance. Respondent No.1 also filed FCOP No.1667 of 2015 on the file of Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam seeking maintenance to herself and her child. Respondent No.1 herein sought damages of Rs.10 lakhs for the physical cruelty and mental agony, maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month to her and Rs.10,000/- per month to her child. Respondent No.1 also sought for shelter by paying rent to the house.

4. Aggrieved by the said DVC, the Petitioner/Respondent No.1 filed the present petition seeking quashment of the same on the following grounds:

a. After delivery of the child, Respondent No,.1 did not return to the conjugal society.

b. After passing of the decree in FCOP No.987 of 2015, though the Petitioner tried to take back Respondent No.1 and their child, she did not join the conjugal society and as such the Petitioner got issued a legal notice dated 26.07.2016 demanding Respondent No.1 to join the conjugal society, but she gave reply with false and frivolous allegations. Ten years after she left the conjugal life, the wife filed the present case, which is a sheer abuse of process of law.

c. When Respondent No.1 had not at all resided with the Petitioner, the question of committing domestic violence against her does not arise.

d. Respondents have already preferred maintenance case in the year 2015, as such, the reliefs claimed in the present case can be adjudicated in the maintenance case. Therefore, continuation of proceedings against the Petitioner amounts to sheer abuse of process of law.

Arguments Advanced at the Bar

5. Heard Sri A.K.Kishore Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.Poolla Sravanthi, learned counsel for Respondents.

6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner/Respondent No.1 would submit that the Petitioner expressed his willingness for restitution of conjugal rights and thereby the