ORAL ORDER

In paragraph No.2 (7^th line onwards), words “The impugned complaint is filed as a counter blast as father had filed a partition suit against the present complainant before the learned Senior Civil Court, Gandhidham on 17.01.2024 just with a view to exert pressure on the present petitioners” be substituted with following words:

“The impugned complaint is filed as a counter blast, after the husband of the complainant filed suit for partition against present petitioner before the learned Senior Civil Court, Gandhidham on 17.01.2024, as father-in-law had application under Senior Citizen Act for possession, just with a view to exert pressure on the present petitioners”.

Rest of the order shall remain as it is. Registry to issue fresh writ accordingly. Present note for speaking to minutes is disposed of in aforesaid terms.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DOMESTIC VIOLANCE ) NO.

8649 of 2025 ==========================================================

SHYAM MANIRAM SAINANI & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR VIRAT G POPAT for MR KB VIRVADIYA(11272) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3 MR NISHIT P GANDHI(6946) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 25/06/2025

ORAL ORDER

By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the BNSS, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the impugned complaint being Criminal Misc. Application No.781 of 2024 filed under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act pending before the Court of learned JMFC, at Gandhidham filed at the instance of respondent No.2.

Having heard learned advocate for the petitioners and learned APP for respondent No.1 – State and perusing the record it appears that petitioner No.1 is father in law, petitioner No.2 is brother in law of respondent No.2, who are U.S. residents and petitioner No.3 is sister in law of respondent No.2. Further, admittedly, even proceedings under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act are not initiated against the husband. The impugned complaint is filed as a counter blast as father had filed a partition suit against the present complainant before the learned Senior

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

Civil Court, Gandhidham on 17.01.2024 just with a view to exert pressure on the present petitioners.

Considering the domestic relationship between the parties and nature of allegations, present petition deserves consideration.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document