IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 52034 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

ANKIT GEHLOT S/O SHRI TULSIRAM GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE JOB

1.

QUARTER NO. 34 BSNL COLONY NAVRATAN BAGH INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

SMT. SHIVKALI GEHLOT W/O SHRI TULSIRAM GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION:

2.

HOUSEWIFE R/O-QUARTER NO.34, BSNL COLONY, NAVRATAN BAGH, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

TULSIRAM GEHLOT S/O LATE SHRI BALESHWAR DAYAL GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCCUPATION:

3.

RETIRED R/O-QUARTER NO.34, BSNL COLONY, NAVRATAN BAGH, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

SMT. SONAL VERMA W/O SHRI SANDEEP VERMA D/O SHRI TULSIRAM GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 4. OCCUPATION: PRIVATE JOB R/O-QUARTER NO.34, BSNL COLONY, NAVRATAN BAGH, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONERS (BY SHRI RAGHVENDRA SINGH RAGHUVANSHI - ADVOCATE)

AND SMT. ANJALI W/O ANKIT GEHLOT, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE JOB, R/O. 42 EXTENSION AJAYBAGH ALKAPURI COLONY MUSAKHEDI ROAD INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (BY MS. SANGEETA CHOUDHARY, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT)

_________________________________________________________

Reserved on :-3/1/2024 Pronounced on :- 22/3/2024 __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ This petition having been heard and reserved for orders, coming on for pronouncement this day, Hon’ble JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA, pronounced the following

ORDER

1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioners / accused for quashment of the proceedings of complaint dated 21/6/2022 filed by the respondent / complainant before the trial Court under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act 2005’), for setting aside the order dated 22/6/2022 passed by the trial Court taking cognizance of the matter and all consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No.MJCR 1608/2022 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Indore.

2. A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the complainant to the effect that this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for challenging proceedings under the Act, 2005 before the trial Court is not maintainable since as of now only application under Section 12 of the Act, 2005 has been filed by the complainant and no order has been passed under any Section of the Act. As long as the proceedings are continuing they are of civil nature and partake the character of criminal proceedings only upon passing of an order under the Act, 2005 which is then breached. It is hence submitted that the instant petition be dismissed as not maintainable. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Apex Court in Pradeep Mehta V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax Ahmedabad, Civil Appeal No.4291/2002 decided on 11/4/2022, Kunapareddy V/s. Kunapareddy (2016) 11 SCC 774 and Khalid Amin Kohli V/s. Union of Territory of Jammu and Kashmir &

Others, CRM (M) No.317/2020 decided on 21/7/2023.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the proceedings under the Act, 2005 are governed by the Cr.P.C as provided under Section 28 thereof hence are criminal proceedings and for quashment of the same a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C would certainly be maintainable. The inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C can be invoked for redressal of grievance of any party at any time and it is not mandatory to wait for an order to be passed under the Act, 2005 before invoking the jurisdiction of this Court. The instant petition is hence maintainable. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Shyamlal Devda & Others V/s. Parimala, (2020) 3 SCC 14 and of the Full Bench of Bombay High Court in Nandkishor Prahlad Vyawahare V/s.

Mangala w/o. Pratap Bansar, 2018 (3) Mh.L.J 913

4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have