Dismissed

Wajahat Ali Yousuf v. Smt. Maliha Masarath

Telangana HC3 Sept 2009CRLP/6706/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners challenged the maintainability of a criminal petition under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, arguing that similar reliefs were pending in other courts. The court held that simultaneous or successive proceedings under different statutes are maintainable and that exoneration in criminal proceedings does not preclude domestic violence reliefs.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petition challenging the maintainability of the domestic violence petition is dismissed.

Wajahat Ali Yousuf Vs Smt. Maliha Masarath — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD

¶2

Criminal Petition No.6706 of 2009

¶3

Dated : 03.09.2009

¶4

Between :

¶5

Wajahat Ali Yousuf & 3 others

¶6

….. Petitioners a n d 1) Smt.Mahila Masarath 2) The State of A.P. ….. Respondents

¶7

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD

¶8

Criminal Petition No.6706 of 2009

¶9

ORDER:

¶10

Heard Sri K.Surender, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri A.Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor, for the second respondent.

¶11

The only ground on which the petition has been filed is that while C.C.No.376 of 2009 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, is already pending, the first respondent also filed M.C.No.159 of 2009 on the file of the Family Court, Nampally, Hyderabad, which is pending adjudication. The petitioners, therefore, contend that when similar reliefs were already pending consideration before the competent Courts, the petition under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is not maintainable in the light of the language of

¶12

Section 26 (2) thereof.

¶13

This Court has already taken a view in the orders pronounced on 02.09.2009 in Crl.P.Nos.6024 of 2009, 6072 of 2009 and 6090 of 2009 that such proceedings are maintainable simultaneously or successively under different provisions under different Statutes and the right of the aggrieved person to multifarious reliefs provided by various provisions can not be excluded.

¶14

Incidentally, petitioners 2 to 4 also claim that they were exonerated by the Police after investigation concerning the criminal liability. However, the same cannot have any relevance in consideration of reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which shall be essentially a question of fact to be enquired into by the trial Court, but not in a summary proceeding under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, the petition does not appear sustainable.

¶15

Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed.

¶16

G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J

¶17

3^rd September, 2009

¶18

SUR

Wajahat Ali Yousuf v. Smt. Maliha Masarath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wajahat Ali Yousuf v. Smt. Maliha Masarath

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

Kandukuri RAmesh Babu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor

Dandam Saki Gopal Vs The State of A.P. rep. by its Public Prosecutor

K.Suraj Israel, Vs Smt.Swapna Priya

Duggisetty Kondaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kandregula Varaha Sankara Nageswara Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

T. Yedukondalu Vs The Station House Officer, Alwal, Shamirpet Mandal