2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 58615
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice P.B. BALAJI
DHILIPKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
SELISHA @ UMAMAHESWARI – Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON: 18-08-2025 PRONOUNCED ON: 29-08-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI CRP No. 2273 of 2024 & CRP NO. 1028 OF 2025 AND CMP NO. 11984 OF 2024& CMP NO. 5959 OF 2025, 1. DHILIPKUMAR S/o.Raghuraman, No.15/8, 7th East Cross Street, Gandhi Nagar, Katpadi, Vellore.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Selisha @ Umamaheswari W/o.Dhilipkumar, Age 34 years, Plot No.3, Maruthi Nagar, Phase I, South Avenue Road, Vallalar, Vellore.
Respondent(s)
CMP No. 11984 of 2024
1. DHILIPKUMAR W/o. A. Radhakrishnan, No.1, Valaiyalkarar Street, Kaveripakkam, Ranipet District - 632 508.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Selisha @ Umamaheswari W/o.Dhilipkumar, Age 34 years, Plot No.3, Maruthi Nagar, Phase I, South Avenue Road, Vallalar, Vellore.
Respondent(s)
CMP No. 5959 of 2025
1. GAJALAKSHMI W/o.Raghuraman, NO.15/8, 7th East Cross Street, Gandhi Nagar, Katpadi, Vellore
2.SELVALAKSHMI W/o.Chinnasamy, NO.15/8, 7th East Cross Street, Gandhi Nagar, Katpadi, Vellore Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Selisha @ Umamaheswari W/o.Dhilipkumar, D/o.Kotteeswaran, Plot No.3, Phase-I, Vallalar, sathuvachari, Vellore-632009 Respondent(s)
CRP No. 1028 of 2025
1. GAJALAKSHMI W/o.Raghuraman, NO.15/8, 7th East Cross Street, Gandhi Nagar, Katpadi, Vellore
2.SELVALAKSHMI W/o.Chinnasamy, NO.15/8, 7th East Cross Street, Gandhi Nagar, Katpadi, Vellore Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Selisha @ Umamaheswari W/o.Dhilipkumar, D/o.Kotteeswaran, Plot No.3, Phase-I, Vallalar, sathuvachari, Vellore-632009 Respondent(s)
CRP No. 2273 of 2024 PRAYER This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order dated 10.04.2024 made in CMP.No.15661 of 2022 in D.V.C.No.17 of 2022 passed by Additional Mahila Court, Vellore.
CMP No. 11984 of 2024 PRAYER To stay the operation of the order dated 11.04.2024 maade in CMP.No.15661 of 2022 in D.V.C.No.17 of 2022 passed by Additional Mahila Court, Vellore.
CMP No. 5959 of 2025 PRAYER To stay all further proceedings in DVC No.17/2022, pending trial on the file of the Judicial Magistrate (Additional Mahila Court), Vellore pending disposal of the CRP CRP No. 1028 of 2025 PRAYER This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to strike off the complaint filed in DVC No.17/2022, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate (Additional Mahila Court), Vellore against revision Petitioners.
IN Both CRPs. 2273 of 2024 For Petitioner(s): M/s. P.V.Murlidhar (in CRP/2273/24) Mr.N.Palanikumar (in CRP/1028/25)
For Respondent(s): M/s. S.Bhargavi Gopalan
COMMON ORDER
The revision in CRP.No.1028 of 2025 has been filed by the mother-in-
law and sister-in-law of the respondent in both these revisions, seeking to strike off the domestic violence complaint in DVC.No.17/2022 filed by the respondent against the respective petitioners. The revision in CRP.No.2273 of 2025 has been filed by the husband, challenging the orders passed in CMP.No.1567 of 2025 in DVC.No.17/2022, in and by which the Judicial Magistrate has allowed the residential petition filed by the wife.
2. I have heard Mr.P.V.Muralidharan, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRP.No.2273/2025 and MR.N.Palanikumar, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRP.No.1028/2025 and Mrs S. Bhargavi Gopalan, learned counsel for the respondent in both the revisions.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the respondent, only with a view to harass the petitioners, namely the husband and mother-in-law, has chosen to initiate a domestic violence complaint. According to the petitioners, the allegations in the domestic violence complaint are not even date-specific and are general and very vague, and the learned magistrate ought not to have taken them on file. The petitioners therefore seek for the domestic violence complaint to be struck off.
4. It is also contended by the petitioner that the DVC complaint has been filed with malafide intention to harass the petitioners and there is absolutely no merit in the allegations made in the