Advocates:
['VIRENDER BHAT', 'R KOUL', '', 'ANJEET KOUR']

CRMC No.274/2016 Page 1 of 14

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

AT JAMMU

CRMC No.274/2016, IA Nos.01/2017, 01/2016

Date of order: 01.02.2019

Ajay Kaul and ors. Vs. State of J&K and ors.

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Judge

Appearing counsel:

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Vi render Bhat, Advocate.

For respondent (s) :

None for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

Mr. R. Koul, Advocate with

Ms. Anjeet Kour, Advocate for respondent No.4.

i)

Whether to be reported in

Digest/Journal

:

Yes/No.

ii)

Whether approved for reporting

in Press/Media

:

Yes/No.

1.

Through the instant petition filed under Section 561-A of the Code of

Criminal Procedure (hereinafter for short, Cr.P.C.) petitioners seek

quashing of proceedings cognizance whereof has been taken as an

offence by order dated 21.10.2014 and also quashing of the order dated

08.06.2015 whereby interim orders of Rs.20,000/- per month and sharing

of the accommodation at Flat bearing No: 6258 (5^thFloor) F-Block, FDDI

Apptts. Sector-50, Noida, has been passed against petitioner No.1.

2.

The case of the petitioners is that respondent No.4, who is the wife of

petitioner No.1, filed an application under the provisions of J&K

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2010. It is stated that

the marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.4 was solemnized

on 21.04.2003 at Udhampur. The case set up by the respondent No.4 is

that after marriage they stayed at Shakti Nagar, Jammu for a few months

and thereafter lived either in Delhi, Mumbai, or Bangalore. The relation

between the petitioner and respondent No: 4 is admittedly stated to have

CRMC No.274/2016 Page 2 of 14

remained cordial for a few years and thereafter the petitioner No.1, his

mother, father are allegedly started demanding dowry. The sister of the

petitioner No.1 is stated to have instigated the petitioner No.1 and his

parents against the respondent No.4. It is stated that perusal of the

complaint of the respondent No. 4 shows that the acts of the domestic

violence have taken place outside the State of J&K i.e., Delhi, Mumbai

or Bangalore and she has stated that petitioner No.1 has rental income

from the accommodation situated at Noida apart from the salary that he

is earning. Thus, it is manifest that the property at Noida is not in his

physical control or actual possession, yet respondent no.4 seeks sharing

of the said accommodation. It is further stated that apart from petitioner

No.1, his mother and sister too have been arrayed as respondents in the

complaint under the J&K Protection for Women from Domestic Violence

Act. The respondent No.2 has taken cognizance of the complaint and

issued the process to the respondents by order dated 21.10.2014. Vide

order dated 08.06.2015 the Court below has passed the interim orders of

Rs.20,000/- per month and sharing of the accommodation at Flat bearing

No:6258 (5th Floor) F-Block, FDDI Apptts. Sector-50, Noida. The said

interim order was challenged in appeal and the said order has been

upheld by the respondent No.3.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that The Jammu And Kashmir

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2010 is a

State Act. The jurisdiction of the adjudicatory authorities is confined to

the incidents of domestic violence taking place within the State, may be

in any district or province and with respect to the parties residing within

the State of J&K. The incidents of domestic violence giving cause of

action outside the State of J&K can be adjudicated under the