Allowed

Dhananjay Murlidhar Patil and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC15 Jul 2022APL/252/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge Criminal Appellate jurisdiction application quashed domestic violence proceedings instituted post-divorce where the respondent had remarried. The bench held such proceedings to be a sheer abuse of process of law and allowed the applicant's petition to quash them.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.62 of 2015 filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was quashed in the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Dhananjay Murlidhar Patil and Ors. Vs the State of… — Domestic Violence | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

ssm 1 901-apl252.15.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APL NO. 252 OF 2015

¶5

Dhananjay Murlidhar Patil & Ors.

¶6

…..Applicants

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State Of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶9

…..Respondents

¶10

Mr. Raviraj S. Gamare for the Applicants. Mr. R.M. Pethe APP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Tukaram Shendge i/by Mr. Amitkumar D. Sale for the Respondent No.2.

¶11

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 15^th JULY, 2022.

¶12

P.C.:-

¶13

By the present Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “ the Cr.P.C.”), Applicant No.1 i.e. erstwhile husband of Respondent No.2 and Applicant Nos.2 to 5 who are the close relatives of Applicant No.1, have questioned the institution of proceedings i.e. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.62 of 2015 filed by the Respondent No.2 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nashik under Section 12 and other related Sections of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, “the said Act”).

¶14

2 Heard Mr. Gamare, learned Advocate for the Applicants, Mr. Pethe, learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Sale, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2. Perused entire record.

¶15

1/3

¶16

ssm 2 901-apl252.15.doc

¶17

3 Record clearly discloses that, by Judgment and Order dated

¶18

22^nd August, 2014 the marriage between the Applicant No.1 and Respondent No.2 was dissolved with effect from the date of passing of the said Judgment and Order by the Family Court No.6, Mumbai. After passing of the decree of dissolution of the said marriage, dated 22^nd August, 2014, the Respondent No.2 filed an Application on 2^nd February, 2015 under Section 12 read with other related Sections of the said Act in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nashik.

¶19

4 Applicants therefore filed the present Application on 18^th March, 2015. By an Order dated 24^th March, 2015, this Court granted stay to the said proceedings pending on the file of the learned Magistrate. The Respondent No.2 thereafter filed Family Court Appeal Stamp No.4726 of 2015 which came to be disposed off as withdrawn by the Division Bench of this Court by an Order dated 23^rd March, 2016.

¶20

5 Learned Advocate appearing for the Respondent No.2 on instructions from his instructing Advocate submitted that, after passing of the Judgment and Decree of dissolution of marriage, the Respondent No.2 has remarried and settled in a life.

¶21

Mr. Gamare, learned Advocate for the Applicants on instructions submitted that, after her marriage with other person, Respondent No.2 has been blessed with two daughters.

¶22

2/3

¶23

ssm 3 901-apl252.15.doc

¶24

6 The aforestated chronology of events clearly indicates that,

¶25

further proceedings of the said Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.62 of 2015 filed under Section 12 and other related Sections of the said Act is a sheer abuse of process of law.

¶26

In view thereof, Petition deserves to be allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and is accordingly allowed.

¶27

(A.S. GADKARI, J.)

¶28

Digitally signed by SANJIV SANJIV SHARNAPPA SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR MASHALKAR Date: 2022.07.21 11:34:56 +0530

¶29

3/3

Dhananjay Murlidhar Patil and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhananjay Murlidhar Patil and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navnit Ramavtar Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Naresh Kumar S/O Hiralal Chotelal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vijay Ramesh Mohite Vs State of Maharashtra

Tulsidas Assudomal Vs Sonia Tulsidas and Anr.

Prashant Appa Awale Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bharat Laxman Pardhi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.