IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)

ON THE 4^th OF NOVEMBER, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 482 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

SMT. ANTIMA PALASALA W/O SHRI VIJAY KUMAR PALASALA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE U-1108, 421, DOCKLANDS DR, DOCKLANDS VIC, MELBOURNCE (AUSTRALIA) (OTHER COUNTRY)

.....PETITIONER (SHRI PRATEEK MAHESHWARI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER .

AND

1. SMT. PRIYANJALI DAS W/O SHRI ANAND DAS, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS 2747, SECTOR- E, SUDAMA NAGAR, P.S. ANNAPUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. SHRI ANAND DAS S/O SHRI KAMAL KISHORE DAS 201-A, HIGHWAY TOWER NEAR RELIANCE FRESH NAVLAKHA AB ROAD (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. KAMAL KISHORE DAS S/O LATE SHRI NARAYAN VALLABH DAS 201-A, HIGHWAY TOWER NEAR RELIANCE FRESH NAVLAKHA AB ROAD (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. SMT. DAMYANTI DAS W/O SHRI KAMAL KISHORE DAS 201-A, HIGHWAY TOWER NEAR RELIANCE FRESH NAVLAKHA AB ROAD (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. ABHILASHA DAS D/O SHRI KAMAL KISHORE DAS 201-A, HIGHWAY TOWER NEAR RELIANCE FRESH NAVLAKHA AB ROAD (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. SHRI MANISH DAS S/O SHRI CHANDRA PRAKASH VALLABH DAS 201-A, HIGHWAY TOWER NEAR RELIANCE FRESH NAVLAKHA AB ROAD (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI ANIL KUMAR DAWALE, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT [R-1].

SHRI KUSHAGRA JAIN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT [R-2-6].

This application coming on for ADMISSION, with consent of the parties heard finally and, the court passed the following:

ORDER

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of Criminal Complaint pending before the JMFC, Indore in MJCR No.997/2021 filed on behalf of respondent no.1/wife of respondent no.2 under Section 12 of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Facts of the case are that respondent no.1/wife was married with respondent no.2/husband on 05.02.2018 as per Hindu Rites and Customs by virtue of this marriage, the parties were not having any issue. Respondent no.1 filed a complaint under the domestic violence against respondents including the present petitioner. The petitioner is sister of respondent no.2. Respondent no.1 filed the complaint due to cruelty, harassment on behalf of respondents including the petitioner. Hence, the present petition before this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Court below has failed to consider that respondent no.1 had no domestic relationship with the present petitioner and the petitioner is sister of respondent no.2. Soon after the marriage, the respondent no.1/wife has never lived with the parents in law and she has no domestic relations with the petitioner. Respondent no.1 has deceitfully attempted to make false story under domestic violence against the petitioner whereas the petitioner having no concerned with the day to day affair of family of the respondent no.2. The petitioner is living in Australia with her husband since long. The learned Court below has taken the cognizance without considering the facts and circumstances of the case which is against the law. The Cognizance of the case seems to have been taken without application of mind by the learned trial court and there remains no reason why the petitioner who has no domestic relationship nor having shared common household at any point of time should be allowed to face trial unnecessarily. Implication of entire family clearly shows ulterior motive and malafide intentions of the complainant to illegally put pressure. It is also submitted that prior to the false implication by respondent no.1, respondent no.2 has filed a complaint/intimation to Police Station -Bhanwarkua, Indore regarding threat of respondent no.1 to implicate the respondents in a false case, but the learned Court below has not considered the same. Hence, the learned trial Court has failed to consider the aspect of the matter and taken the cognizance contrary to the settled proportions of law and continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of proce