Dismissed

A. Sivakumar v. S. Gayathiri

Madras HC19 Mar 2024CRP/1011/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband's family sought to strike off a domestic violence complaint filed three years after separation. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Arul Daniel v. Suganya, the High Court held maintainability issues must be raised before the Magistrate and dismissed the revision petition.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners given liberty to raise jurisdictional and maintainability issues before the concerned Magistrate; no costs; connected CMPs closed.

A. Sivakumar Vs S. Gayathiri — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P.(PD).No.1011 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 19.03.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

C.R.P.(PD).No.1011 of 2024 and C.M.P.Nos.5232 and 5233 of 2024

¶7

1.A.Sivakumar

¶8

2.M.Ayyasamy 3.A.Bakiyam ... Petitioners

¶9

¶10

S.Gayathiri ... Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for the records relating to the D.V.A.No.180 of 2023 on the file of the DVA Special Court at Coimbatore and strike off the same.

¶12

For Petitioners : Ms.K.Anusuya

¶13

For Respondent : Mrs.Radhika Boopathi

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the complaint made by

¶16

the wife of the 1^st petitioner under the Domestic Violence Act.

¶17

The proceedings initiated under Domestic Violence Act has been 1/4

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

C.R.P.(PD).No.1011 of 2024

¶20

challenged by the petitioners on the ground that complaint was lodged after three years of separation from the 1^st petitioner. Terming the complaint as an abuse of process of the Court, the petitioners seeks this Court to strike out the same from the file of DVA Special Court at Coimbatore.

¶21

The Full Bench of this Court in Arul Daniel vs. Suganya reported in (2022) 4 MLJ (Crl) 561 , while considering the remedy available to the aggrieved person in domestic violence cases against whom proceedings were initiated observed as follows:-

¶22

“76. ... ... ... ... vii. As there is no issuance of process as contemplated under Section 204, Cr.P.C in a proceeding under the D.V Act, the principle laid down in Adalat Prasad v Rooplal Jindal (2004 7 SCC 338) that a process, under Section 204, Cr.P.C, once issued cannot be reviewed or recalled, will not apply to a proceeding under the D.V Act. Consequently, it would be open to an aggrieved respondent(s) to approach the Magistrate and raise the issue of maintainability and other preliminary issues. Issues like the existence of a shared household/domestic relationship etc., which form the jurisdictional basis for entertaining an application under Section 12, can be determined as a preliminary issue, in appropriate cases. Any person aggrieved by such an order may also take recourse to an appeal under Section 29 of the D.V Act for effective redress (See V.K

¶23

2/4

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

C.R.P.(PD).No.1011 of 2024

¶26

Vijayalekshmi Amma v Bindu. V., (2010) 87 AIC 367). This would stem the deluge of petitions challenging the maintainability of an application under Section 12 of the D.V Act, at the threshold before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.”

¶27

In view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Arul

¶28

Daniel vs. Suganya reported in (2022) 4 MLJ (Crl) 561 , the petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned Magistrate and raise all jurisdictional and maintainability issues.

¶29

With this liberty, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No

¶30

costs. Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶31

19.03.2024

¶32

Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No dm

¶33

¶34

The DVA Special Court, Coimbatore.

¶35

3/4

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

C.R.P.(PD).No.1011 of 2024

¶38

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

¶39

¶40

C.R.P.(PD).No.1011 of 2024

¶41

19.03.2024

¶42

4/4

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A. Sivakumar v. S. Gayathiri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Sivakumar v. S. Gayathiri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Vijayakumar Vs T.Soundhari

P.L.Meenachisundram Vs L.Gopal

P.Kannammal Vs Monisha Jagadeeswaran

M.Ramasamy Vs v.P.Raja

Rickamchand Jain Vs Mrs.Kasthuri

Elavarasan Vs Vasantha