The maintainability of domestic violence complaints hinges on the establishment of a lawful marriage, which must be substantiated by credible evidence.

ORDER

The revision petitioners claim to be the husband and wife. The respondent herein claiming herself to be the wife of the first petitioner has initiated Domestic Violence Complaint against both the petitioners and the petitioners have come forward with the present revision to strike of the Domestic Violence Complaint in D.V.C. No.11 of 2024.

2. I have heard Mr.R. Suryaprakash, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.R. Ramesh, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners are happily married husband and wife and with an ulterior motive and false allegations, the respondent claiming as if she is the wife of the first petitioner has initiated maintenance claim in M.C. No.1 of 2021, which was pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi and subsequent to transfer it has been re-numbered as M.C. No.20 of 2022.

4. The petitioners have stoutly denied the matrimonial relationship between the first petitioner and the respondent and according to them, the first petitioner and the respondent have never been husband and wife and they never lived together in any relationship.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that having filed Maintenance Claim way back in 2021, after a lapse of more than three years, the present Domestic Violence Compliant has been initiated. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the respondent has not even explained the delay and is trying to rake up issues that have allegedly arisen in the year 2019 and referring to the averments in the maintenance case, the learned counsel for the petitioners would state that there is absolutely no allegation of any incidents of domestic violence against the petitioners and only when the maintenance case was taken up for trial, the respondent has rushed to file a Domestic Violence Complaint, with totally false and baseless allegations.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would further state that the property in which the respondent was residing was the property that was taken on rent by the respondent herself and the petitioners, more specifically, the first petitioner has absolutely no role to play and it is falsely alleged by the respondent that an immovable property has also been purchased by the first petitioner in the name of the respondent and that the original documents are available inside the tenanted premises, which has been locked by the landlord consequent to default in payment of rent and it is therefore prayed that the petitioners are willing to defend the maintenance claim in a manner known to law, but they cannot subjected to harassment before the criminal Court in a false Domestic Violence Complaint filed by the respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner would therefore pray for revision being allowed and the Domestic Violence Complaint viz., D.V.C. No.11 of 2024, being struck of.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent Mr.R.Ramesh would state that the respondent has filed not only the marriage invitation card, which evidences the marriage of the first petitioner and the respondent, but also a birth certificate of a male child, born to the first petitioner and the respondent on 20.02.2011.

8. The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioners were husband and wife admittedly and they were not blessed with any children and therefore with the consent of the second petitioner, the first petitioner married the respondent and a m