IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.206 OF 2020

C/W

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201 OF 2020

In Crl.P.No.206/2020

BETWEEN:

1.

Sri Kishore Daga

Son of Late Radhakishan Daga,

Aged about 59 years,

2.

Smt. Santhosh Daga,

Wife of Kishore Daga

Aged about 54 years,

Petitioners 1 and 2 are

R/at No.10(old), New No.21,

Bhagirathi Ammal Street,

Rajan Street, T.Nagar,

Chennai-600017.

…Petitioners

(By Sri S.Srivatsa, Senior Counsel for

Smt. Jayasree Narasimhan, Advocate)

AND:

Smt. Ritu Maheshwari

Wife of Anirudh Daga,

Aged about 31 years,

Residing at No.T 803,

SNN Raj Lakeview Apartment,

Phase 2, Ranka Colony Road,

:: 2 ::

Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road,

Bengaluru-560076.

…Respondent

(By Sri V.R.Balasubramani, Advocate)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482

of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the proceedings against

them in C.Misc.No.165/2019 under Section 12 of the

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act

before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court VI.

In Crl.P.No.201/2020

BETWEEN:

Smt. Suruchi Daga Saboo

Wife of Siddharth Saboo

Aged about 31 years,

Residing at A62,

Sriram Marg, Shyam Nagar,

Jaipur-302019.

…Petitioner

(By Sri S.Srivatsa, Senior Counsel for

Smt. Jayasree Narasimhan, Advocate)

AND:

Smt. Ritu Maheshwari

Wife of Anirudh Daga,

Aged about 31 years,

Residing at No.T 803,

SNN Raj Lakeview Apartment,

Phase 2, Ranka Colony Road,

Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road,

Bengaluru-560076.

…Respondent

(By Sri V.R.Balasubramani, Advocate)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482

of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the proceedings against

her in C.Misc.No.165/2019 under Section 12 of the

:: 3 ::

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act

before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court VI.

These

Criminal

Petitions

coming

on

for

admission this day, the Court made the following:

ORDER

These two petitions filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C., are disposed of by a common order as the

petitions

in

both

the

cases

emanate

from

Crl.Misc.No.165/2019

on

the

file

of

the

Metropolitan

Magistrate,

Traffic

Court-VI,

Bengaluru, filed under Section 12 of the Protection

of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (‘Act’

for short).

2.

The petitioners in Crl.P.No.206/2020 are

the father-in-law and mother-in-law; and the

petitioner in Crl.P.No.201/2020 is the sister-in-law

of the respondent-Ritu Maheshwari. They have

sought quashing of the proceedings against them.

3.

The

facts

are

that

the

respondent

married

the

son

of

the

petitioners

in

:: 4 ::

Crl.P.No.206/2020

on

13.07.2016

at

Chennai.

Thereafter, differences arose between the husband

and wife, as the latter found the husband to be a

womanizer, alcoholic and a victim of vices. This

was the main reason for the differences between

the husband and wife. These differences led the

second respondent to

approach

the

Court

of

Magistrate at Bengaluru with an application under

Section 12 of the Act seeking various reliefs.

4.

Heard

Sri

S.Srivatsa,

learned

Senior

Counsel

for

the

petitioners

and

Sri

V.R.Balasubramani,

learned

counsel

for

the

respondent in both the petitions.

5.

The argument of Sri S.Srivatsa, learned

senior counsel is that if the complaint made by the

respondent under Section 12 of the Act is read,

what is found is that all the allegations are against

the husband. There are no actual allegations

against the petitioners subjecting the respondent

:: 5 ::

to any kind of domestic violence. What is stated

in the complaint against the petitioners is that,

they instigated the husband and except this, there

are no allegations at all to come to a conclusion

that the respondent can initiate action against

them in relation to domestic violence. His further

submission

is

that

the