HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

CRM(M) No. 319/2019

CrlM No. 756/2019

CrlM No. 1531/2021

Pronounced on: 15.08.2022

Suraj Parkash Singh and others

…. Petitioner/Appellant(s)

Through:-

Mr. R. K. S. Thakur, Advocate.

V/s

Arti Devi

…..Respondent(s)

Through:-

Mr. Navneet Dubey, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON9BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

01. The petitioners have assailed the order dated 19.01.2018 passed by

the learned City Judge (JMIC), Jammu and the order dated 22.10.2018

passed in appeal by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Jammu,

whereby the order of the learned City Judge (JMIC), Jammu has been

upheld. The petitioners in this petition also seek quashing of the

complaint as well as proceedings initiated against them under the

provisions of Jammu & Kashmir Protection of Women from Domestic

Violence Act, 2010.

02. The facts as narrated in the petition are as under:-

Petitioner No. 1 was married with respondent-Arti Devi in the year 2012

in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Customs on 28.10.2012. The

relations between the parties were not cordial and differences arose

between them, as such, petitioner No. 1 filed a petition under Section 13

of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage in the Court of

2

CRM(M) No. 319/2019

Principal District Judge, Ramban on 21.04.2014. The respondent-Arti

Devi initially appeared in the proceedings before the Court of Principal

District Judge, Ramban but subsequently, remained absent and was,

accordingly, set ex-parte on 31.01.2015. The petition for dissolution of

marriage was decided on 29.05.2015 and the marriage between the

parties was dissolved on 29.05.2015, on the grounds of cruelty and

desertion by the respondent.

03.

The respondent filed an application under the provisions of The

Jammu & Kashmir Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,

2010 (hereinafter to be referred to as >Domestic Violence Act?) against

the petitioners i.e., her husband, mother-in-law, three sister-in-laws, two

brother-in-laws and aunt of her husband. The allegations leveled against

the petitioners were that the life of the respondent was made miserable

due to atrocities and cruelty of the petitioners, right from the inception of

marriage, it is alleged that the petitioners did not treat her well and also

had demanded dowry and had also taken away all the valuable items of

the respondent. The allegations against the other relatives of the

petitioners are that they also threatened the respondent to do as her

husband would ask her to do, otherwise she would have to face the

consequences. The mother of her husband was also not happy with the

respondent and used to torment her. It was also alleged that petitioner

No. 1 was having illicit relations with some other woman. It is submitted

that the respondent was subjected to constant physical, mental, emotional

and economic abuse by the petitioners. The respondent, therefore, in her

application had sought monetary relief of maintenance, compensation,

3

CRM(M) No. 319/2019

police protection against harassment as also an order to reside in the

shared household.

04.

The petitioners filed their objections to the application and

submitted that the application is not maintainable since the marriage of

petitioner No. 1 and the respondent/wife has been dissolved by a decree

of divorce on 29.05.2015 by the learned Principal District Judge,

Ramban. It was submitted that the respondent was neither an aggrieved

person nor in domestic relationship with petitioner No. 1 in terms of the

Domestic Violence Act, as she had herself left the matrimonial home. It

was also submitted that the Domestic Incident Report with the

application had been prepared and filed by the respondent & her counsel

and, therefore, the same cannot be taken into consideration while

initiating any proceedings und