The court ruled that petitions under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings under the D.V. Act are not maintainable before the High Court unless the proceedings reach the cognizance stage.

O R D E R

The petitioners seek to quash the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “D.V. Act” for brevity), in D.V.Case No.1 of 2025, pending on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate at Pallipattu, as against the petitioners, in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2.Since the Full Bench of this Court, in Arul Daniel v. Suganya reported in (2022) SCC OnLine Mad 5435, has categorically held that a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging a proceeding under Section 12 of the D.V. Act is not maintainable, the Registry has entertained a doubt as to the maintainability of this Criminal Original Petition.

3.Therefore, the matter is listed before this Court under the caption “for maintainability”.

4.Brief background of the case is as follows :

The respondent/complainant got married to one N.S.Kiran Kumar on 21.10.2018 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. It is the case of the respondent/wife that her husband had illicit relationship with another lady and he exerted tort, assault and inhuman activities on the respondent/wife without even providing her with basic amenities like shelter, food and clothes and used to abuse her in a filthy language. When the respondent/wife questioned the same, her husband as well as her in-laws did not lend their ears to the respondent and they further demanded a dowry of Rs.5,00,000/-. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present complaint in D.V.Case No.1 of 2025 as against her husband and in-laws under Section 12 of the D.V. Act before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Pallipattu, seeking protection order, residence order, compensation order and other reliefs. The petitioners, who are the mother-in-law, brother-in-law and his wife, have filed the present Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashment of the said complaint filed under Section 12 of the D.V. Act.

5.Learned counsel for the petitioners would mainly submit that, in view of the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi v. Vidhi Rawal reported in (2025) SCC OnLine SC 1158, a complaint filed under Section 12 of the D.V. Act can be challenged before the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and the same is maintainable.

6.I have perused the entire judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shaurabh Kumar's case (supra).

7.The facts in Shaurabh Kumar's case (supra) are that the wife had lodged an FIR in Crime No.3 of 2022 against her husband and her relatives under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 r/w. 34 IPC, alleging demand of dowry. Besides, she has also lodged a complaint under Section 12 of the D.V. Act before the Magistrate, alleging that her husband would beat her and throw her out of the house while they were abroad. The husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law have filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the complaint filed by the wife under Section 12 of the D.V. Act. However, the High Court dismissed the quash petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., holding that the proceedings under Section 12 of the D.V. Act are purely civil in nature. Aggrieved by which, the brother-in-law (Shaurabh Kumar) has preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein, it was contended that a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as against the proce