C.R.P.No.229 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.02.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

C.R.P.No.229 of 2023

and

C.M.P.Nos.1886 & 1889 of 2023

1.Subramaniam

2.Easwari

3.Jayapal

...

Petitioners

Vs

1.Chitra

2.The Honey Well Technology Solutions Lap Private Limited

Having its office at

Survey #96 & 97, Boganahalli Village,

Survey #72/2 & 72/5, Doddakananahalli,

Bangalore, Karnataka – 560 103.

...

Respondents

Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India to call for the records pertaining to DVA No.2 of 2022

pending on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Dharapuram

1/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.No.229 of 2023

and strike out the petitioners name and the same as abuse process of law and

by allowing the present Civil Revision Petition.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.C.S.Saravanan

ORDER

The Civil Revision Petition is filed to strike off DVA No.2 of 2022.

The revision petitioner is the father-in-law of the first

respondent/complainant who instituted a domestic violence proceedings in

DVA No.2 of 2022 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court at

Darapuram.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the marriage

between the first respondent/complainant and the son of the revision

petitioner was solemnised on 17.02.2019 and unfortunately, the son of the

revision petitioner died on 19.04.2021. Regarding the settlement of the

service benefits of the deceased employee, the revision petitioner claims

certain benefits and the first respondent/complainant also claims the service

2/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.No.229 of 2023

benefits of her deceased husband to be settled in her favour in entirety. That

apart, further allegations are also raised with reference to the conduct of the

revision petitioner as father-in-law. The learned counsel for the petitioner

states that there is no dowry harassment or demand of money from the first

respondent complainant and thus, the DV proceeding is not maintainable

and is to be striked off.

3.This Court is of the considered opinion that the revision petitioner

has mis-construed the scope of the provisions of the Protection of the

Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, Section 3 provides definition of

domestic violence extracted as under:

3. Definition of domestic violence.—For the purposes of this

Act, any act, omission or commission or conduct of the

respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it—

(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb

or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved

person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse,

3/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.No.229 of 2023

sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse;

or

(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved person

with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to

meet any unlawful demand for any dowry or other property or

valuable security;

or

(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any

person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause (a) or

clause (b);

or

(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical or

mental, to the aggrieved person. Explanation I.—For the

purposes of this section,—

(i) “physical abuse” means any act or conduct which is

of such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm, or

danger to life, limb, or health or impair the health or

development of the aggrieved person and includes

assault, criminal intimidation and criminal force;

(ii) “sexual abuse” includes any conduct of a sexual

nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise

violates the dignity of woman;

4/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.No.229 of 2023

(iii) “verbal and emotional abuse” includes—

(a) insults, ridicule, humiliation,