Allowed

Shanmugam, M/55 v. S.Barathi

Madras HC26 Mar 2019CRL OP/22100/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashed proceedings against petitioners (in-laws) in a Domestic Violence Act case, conditioning the quash on husband depositing Rs.5,000 monthly as maintenance and directing trial court to complete trial within one month.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings quashed against petitioners; husband directed to deposit Rs.5,000 monthly as ad-interim maintenance; trial directed to be completed in one month.

Shanmugam, M/55 Vs S.Barathi — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 26.03.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.22100 of 2016

¶6

Shanmugam 2. Kavery 3. S.Moorthy

¶7

Revathy

¶8

Perumal

¶9

Guruval ... Petitioners
Vs.
S.Barathi ...Respondent

¶10

PRAYER:

¶11

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to call for the records in DVC No.20 of 2016, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani and quash the same.

¶12

For Petitioners: Mr.K.Balasubramaniam For Respondent : Mr.R.Prabakar O R D E R

¶13

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in DVC No.20 of 2016, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani and quash the same.

¶14

The petitioners are in-laws of the respondent and the marriage between A1/Rajendran and the respondent Viz.,S.Barathi was solemnized on 01.04.2005. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes the respondent and her husband were living separately from the matrimonial home. Under this circumstance, the respondent herein filed a petition under Domestic Violence Act in DVC No.20 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani and implicated the petitioners as parties to the petition and sought action as against them under Domestic

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

Violence Act. The said DVC No.20 of 2016 is pending for trial. At this stage, the petitioners herein in-laws of the respondent pray to quash the proceedings in DVC No.20 of 2016.

¶17

Heard Mr.K.Balasubramaniam learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.R.Prabakar learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶18

It is seen that the relief sought for by the respondent in the domestic violence case with regard to residential rights, compensation, etc., can be made and claimed as against her husband, who is already a party in that case. The petitioners herein are only in-laws of the respondent and they are living separately. As such, the protection order sought for by the respondent herein in the domestic violence case against petitioners/in-laws, based on the allegations, cannot be maintained, in view of the fact that the allegations of harassment meted out by the petitioners against the respondent itself seems to be false. While that being so, there cannot be any act of any domestic violence as defined under Domestic Violence Act against petitioners. In the absence of the same, the proceedings as against petitioners cannot be maintained and consequently, the petitioners need not undergo the ordeal of facing a criminal trial.

¶19

In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings in DVC No.20 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani, insofar all the petitioners are allowed, on condition that, they shall ensure that the A1/husband of the respondent shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five Thousand only) per month before 5^th of every English Calendar month to the credit of DVC No.20 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani, as ad-interim maintenance, without prejudice to both the parties, failing which this order shall sand automatically cancelled. On such deposit being made, the respondent is entitled to withdraw the same.

¶20

Insofar as A1/husband of the respondent is concerned, since the impugned proceedings in DVC No.20 of 2016 is pending from the year 2016 onwards, it would be appropriate to direct the trial Court to complete the trial within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A1/husband of the respondent is directed to appear before the trial Court on the next hearing date, failing which, the respondent is at liberty to approach this Court.

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

In the result, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.

¶23

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ssr
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate,
Bhavani.
2. Do- Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Erode.
+2cc to Mr.K.Balasubramaniam, Advocate, S.R.No.28656
+1cc to Mr.R.Prabakar, Advocate, S.R.No.29421
Crl.O.P.No.22100 of 2016
SKV(CO)
CS/08/05/2019

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Shanmugam, M/55 v. S.Barathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanmugam, M/55 v. S.Barathi

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

T.Rajendran Vs State by

M.S.Adhisankaran Vs Manipriya

M.Sendhilkumar Vs the State Rep by

Srinivasa Raghavan Vs Tmt. R. Anandhi

S.Sivaraman Vs State by

R.Pannerselvam Vs the State Rep by Its