BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl.O.P.(MD).No.18733 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.(MD).Nos.15514 and 15515 of 2025

1. Sivakumar

2. Babu

3. Shanthi 4. Ramesh

5. Kalaiselvi .... Petitioners Vs.

Vennilla ... Respondent Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records in the impugned proceeding in D.V.O.P.No.28 of 2019, on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Court (Judicial Magistrate Level), Dindigul and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner : Mrs.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya

ORDER

Preface:

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quashment of the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2. While exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court is required to strike a careful balance between preventing abuse of process and ensuring that beneficial social welfare legislations are not rendered otiose at the threshold, particularly when the pleadings disclose a prima facie case warranting adjudication.

Factual matrix:

3. The respondent herein has filed a petition under Section 12 of the Act in D.V.C.No.28 of 2019 before the Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul, alleging that she was subjected to domestic violence in multiple forms, including physical, emotional and economic abuse, during the subsistence of her matrimonial relationship.

4. In the said petition, the respondent has specifically pleaded various incidents constituting domestic violence and has sought statutory reliefs under: (i)Section 18 – Protection Order (ii) Section 19 – Return of matrimonial home articles, appliances, jewellery and other movable properties (iii)Section 20 – Monetary relief and maintenance and (iv)Section 22 – Compensation for mental agony and emotional distress.

5. Challenging the maintainability of the said proceedings, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashment of the Domestic Violence Case in limine. Contentions of the petitioners:

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the proceedings are vexatious in nature and that the learned Magistrate has mechanically taken the complaint on file without application of mind.

7. It is the further contention of the petitioners 2 to 5 is that, they are not directly involved in the matrimonial life of the respondent and that the allegations made against them are exaggerated and motivated.

8. According to the petitioners, the dispute is purely matrimonial and civil in nature, and the continuation of proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act would amount to abuse of process of law.

9. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and carefully perused the materials available on record.

Point for consideration:

10. The point that arises for consideration is whether the proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.28 of 2019 deserve to be quashed at the threshold, in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973, when the petition under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, contains specific pleadings of domestic violence and seeks statutory reliefs?

Analysis:

11. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is a social welfare legislation, enacted with the avowed object of providing effective and speedy remedies to women who are victims of domestic violence.

12. The definition of “domestic violence” under Section 3 of the Act is expansive and takes within its fold not only physical abuse but also emotional abuse, verbal abuse and economic abuse.

13. A careful perusal of the impugned petition filed under Section 12 of the Act reveals that the respondent has narrated specific incidents relating to denial of financial support, emotional cruelty, and non-return of her matrimonial articles,