Allowed

Amutha v. M.Dharani

Madras HC17 Oct 2019CRL OP(MD)/10288/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court quashed the Domestic Violence Petition proceedings insofar as they involved petitioners who were living separately and had no domestic relationship with the respondent, holding such inclusion an abuse of the process of court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The proceedings against the husband remain open.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.7 of 2017 are quashed insofar as they concern the petitioners; the Judicial Magistrate is directed to dispose of the matter against the husband within three months.

Amutha Vs M.Dharani — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

CRL.O.P(MD)No.10288 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 17.10.2019

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

CRL.O.P(MD)No.10288 of 2017 and CrL.M.P(MD)Nos.7026 & 7027 of 2017

¶7

Amutha 2. T.Baskaran ... Petitioners/Respondents Vs.

¶8

M.Dharani ... Respondent/ De facto Complainant

¶9

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records of the proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.07 of 2017, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul-1 and quash the same as against these petitioners are concerned.

¶10

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Arul Jenifer For Respondent : No Appearance

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.7 of 2017, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul, insofar as the petitioners herein are concerned.

¶13

The first Petitioner is the mother-in-law and the second petitioner is the father-in-law of the respondent.

¶14

It is seen from the records that the petitioners 1 and 2 were living separately and the respondent is living separately and therefore, no domestic violence can be attributed as against the petitioners 1 and 2. The respondent has not made any specific allegations against the petitioners 1 and 2, except for certain general allegations and certain specific averments have been made by the respondent only against her husband. Even in the absence of a domestic relationship with the respondent, the petitioners 1 and 2 have been roped in a Domestic Violence Petition.

¶15

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners.

¶16

In the considered view of this Court, the petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned, the entire proceedings is an abuse of process https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

1/2

¶18

CRL.O.P(MD)No.10288 of 2017

¶19

of Court and the same requires interference of this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶20

In the result, the proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.7 of 2017, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul, is quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned. It is left open to the respondent herein to proceed further to prosecute the Domestic Violence Petition as against the husband is concerned.

¶21

This Criminal Original Petition is allowed and there shall be a direction to the Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul, to dispose of the proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.07 of 2017, as against the husband, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )

¶26

tsg

¶27

¶28

The Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul-1.

¶29

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶30

CRL.O.P(MD)No.10288 of 2017 and CrL.M.P(MD)Nos.7026 & 7027 of 2017

¶31

17.10.2019

¶32

CS(08.11.2019) 2P 3C

¶33

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

¶34

2/2

Amutha v. M.Dharani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amutha v. M.Dharani

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

U.Arumugam Vs Ramaiah Nadar

Yasothai Vs Senthamarai

M.Vadivel Vs R.Nallasamy

Jebakkani Pappa Vs K. Hemalatha

Madhusuthanan, Vs Kavitha Priyadharshini

K.S.K.Mohammed Masuthu, Vs R.Meeral @ Jasmine