Dismissed

Smt. P Parvathi v. Smt. Pathloth Mangamma

Telangana HC7 Jul 2022CRLP/5840/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal petition filed to quash domestic violence proceedings. The Court held that such proceedings are more civil than criminal and cannot be quashed merely due to attendance difficulties, issuing guidelines for lower courts.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition No.5840 of 2022 was dismissed; guidelines were laid down for lower courts regarding domestic violence proceedings.

Smt. P Parvathi Vs Smt. Pathloth Mangamma — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2022)

jI I

I I I I I I I I I

I I I i

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO

¶8

THURSDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTWO

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTTCE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶11

CRIMIN PE ON NO: OF 22

¶12

Between:

¶13

1' lTt P Parvathi, wo poor singh, Aged about 56 years, occ. House maker.
,flf J!',#i"?'l.f ligillsil{a..:.,i[:s?lxi3l,i,,1,#3Tf ri"s:id*"''"'"
;s:{?"Ji,S':gi+fru,'[!H:riH:m'si#*i:";T,^.,1"11l'J"]
set Et sst 1, Ramaiah r,,taoar ctrbny] Liff;i"'it;, d Ha nsa Reddy, rS
4. sri p suresh, s/o poot-Sinsh, Ad6J;ffii'31;,y;;;'r,'At" privare Emotovee.
-_
R/o 1 -se/b, otd Linsampalyl Se,iTi" gam prlv, "nli"glhioy rs 1 ;,,' "'", "",
.....PETITIONERS/ RESPONOENTS NO 2 TO 5
1. Smt. Pathloth Manqamma. W/o pathloth Nagender, Aged 50 years, Occ.
Housw wife, Ryo 1-09/2. N; e
2
rn"-si"i.i'iiili"d#..'i"#:t7,fi1r."",.Jltyf,ESlr".f,:,.?i',,;,Hi,., on,""..

¶14

AND

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Section- 4g2 of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminai Fuiiiion, the High court mav !e^{qtegse!. to quashproca,e.dings} p;iiiior,"iri n""p""0"."i '' N;;'i;"; herein in DVC No'88 of 2o22 on tnJrit" "g"inri or H."tr" ii Additionar rr,r"t-poiiiun Magistrate at Kukatpally under domestic ,ioi.n"e ""t-

¶17

l.A. NO:2 o F 2022

¶18

Petition under Section -^{4^g2of Cr.p.Cprayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Crilnlnai Feiition,the H;Sl_, C"rrt r* be pleased to dispense the appearance of the petitionerr/n*p.ri""ii;.) i;; herein in DVC No.88 of 2022 on the fire of Hon'bre ii i,tetroportan Magistrate at Hyderabad

¶19

This Petitbn coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri ARTKATLA ELlsoN ,Advocate for the petitioners and tne nssislnt pubric prosecutor on behalfof the Respondent No.2 and of None appeared for the Respondent No. 1

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE CHTLLAKTIR SUMALATHA CzuMINAL PETITION No.5840 of2022

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Submissions made by the learned counsel for petitioners as well as the learned Assistant public Prosecutor have received the due consideration of the Court.

¶24

Seeking the Court to quash the proceedings that are pending against the petitioners/respondent Nos.2 to 5 in D.V.C.No.88 of 2022 that is pending on the lile of the Court of IX Additional Metropolitan Magrstrate, Kukatpally, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

¶25

Sans unnecessary details, respondent No.l gave a report to the Protection Oflicer that she was subjected to domestic violence by her husband and other family members and therefore, she is in requirement of protection from the said domestic violence and further, she requires finalcial assistance. The Protection Offrcer thereafter submitted a domestic incident report. Consequently, proceedings against the husband of respondent No. I and.

¶26

I t

¶27

¶28

Dr.CSL. J

¶29

CrlPNo.SS4O ol2Ob2

¶30

!II i

¶31

the petitioners who are arrayed as respondent Nos.2 to 5 commenced.

¶32

During the course of hearing, the main grievance exhibited by the learned corursel for the petitioners is tl.at the court is insisting the physical attendance of the petitioners for each and every adjournment of the said Domestic Violence Case and therefore, the petitioners are facing serious hardship. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners are no way connected with the family a-ffairs of respondent No.l and ber husband and only because they are distantly related to the husband of respondent No. 1 they are roped into the proceedings. He further contended that the petitioners were falsely implicated by respondent No. 1 with an intention to wreck vengeance against her husband. By stating so, the learned counsel sought for quashing of proceedings that are pending against tie petitioners in the said Domestic Violence Case.

¶33

Opposing the relief sought for and submitting that only because the petitioners are unable to attend the trial Court, the entire proceedings in the said Domestic Violen^^

D/-CSL. J CrlPNo-'84O of2022

¶38

Case cannot be quashed, the learned Assistant public Prosecutor stated that all the proceedings that would be conducted in domestic violence cases are civil in nature and hence, quashing of proceedings is undesirable.

¶39

The^protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is a legislation enacted to shield the rights of women which are enshrined and guaranteed r.mder the Constitution of India, besides paving way to deal with the matters connected to and arising out of the family disputes in an effective and efficacious manner.

¶40

When the provisions contained in the said legislation i.e., ?he protection of, Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2OO5 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 20O5,, for brevity) are looked into, it is very clear that the proceedings tl.a.t would be conducted are more civil in nature. The protection orders that would be granted under Section 1g, the residence orders that would be granted under Section 19, the monetaqz reliefs that would be granted under Section 20, the custody orders that would be granted under Section 21 and the compensation orders ttrat would be gr-anted under Section 22, would be based on_Jhe -

¶41

¶42

¶43

D..CSL, J CrlPNo.S84O of 2022

¶44

applications that would be filed by the aggrieved persons, the domestic incident reports and the defence taken by the respondents therein. AII those proceedings are civil in nature. No doubt, Section 2g (1) of the Act of 2O05 lays down that the proceedings shall be governed by the provisions of Code of Criminal procedure. However, it is specifically mentioned under Section 2g(21 of the Act of 2005 that the Court is empowered to lay down its own procedure for disposal of the applications filed by the aggrieved persons or the protection ollicers. May be due to the fact that the power to deal with the domestic violence cases is given to the Magrstrate, the Iitigant public are under the impression that the proceedings initiated under the Act of 2OO5 are purely criminal in nature.

¶45

Section 2(i) of the Act of 2005 states that "tltagistrate, means Judicial Magistrate of First Class or the Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case lnay be, exercising jurisdiction under the Code of Criminal procedure. However, as indicated earlier, the proceedings under the Act t,i 2OO5 aie more ciyil in nature. Section 31 of the Act of 2oo5 is the only provision which makes the breach

¶46

¶47

Dr.CSL, J Crl.PNo.Sa4O of 2O22

¶48

committed within the purview of the Act of 2OO5 pr:nishable. As per Section 31 of the Act of 20O5, breach of a protection order or an interim protection order is a punishable offence. Further, Section 31(3) of tl:e Act of 2005 empowers the Magistrate to frame charges under Section 498-A IPC or any of the provisions of the Indian Penal Code or the Dowry Prohibition Act while fra:rring charge for the offences punishable for breach of tle protection order or interim protection order. May be due to that reason i.e., to deal with the offence committed by breaching tI-re protection order or an interim protection order ard the connected offences punishable under t-he Indian Penal Code and the Dou.r5r Prohibition Act, the legislature by all it wisdom has empowered the Judicial Magistrate of First Class to deal with the matters pertaining to other provisions and for issuance of required order$ as enumerated under Sections 18 to 22 of the Act of 2O05. That does not mean that the entire proceedings that would be conducted by the Magistrate under the Act of 2OO5 are criminal in nature. Thus, when the orders that would be granted in domestic violence cases, basing on the material produced, are civil in nature, it has to be seen

¶49

¶50

Dr.CSL, J dPNos84O of 2022

¶51

how far it is^justiliable on part of the^parties against^whom the aggrieved person or the Protection Officer has initiated proceedings to seek quash of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶52

Law is well setfled that in a petition flled under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the High Court is required to examine whether its intervention is required for prevention of abuse of law or otherwise to secure the ends of^justice. It is only 1n extremely extraordinary cases that the Courts can exercise its^jurisdiction conferred under Section 482 C.P.C. to quash the proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Only on t-he sole ground that the parties arrayed as respondents by the agrieved 1n person face difltculty attending the Court, the proceedings against them cannot be quashed. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the petition filed for quashing of proceedings is unsustainable.

¶53

The same view is expressed by the combined^High Court in the case between Gaddameedi^{NagamaniVs. State}

¶54

¶55

Dr.CSL, J CrlPNo.5840 of 2O22

¶56

¶57

of Telanganar Ys. Giduthttri Kesari Kumar and Ors Vs. State of Telangana and Ors2.

¶58

Resultanfly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶59

It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that number of CriminaJ Petitions are llled before the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings in domestic violence cases, only becamse the trial Courts are insisting the physical attendance of the respondents in those cases for each and every adjournment.

¶60

i3. Therefore, before parting with the case, this Court considers it desirable to lay down certain guidelines for the Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, which are empowered to deal $rith the domestic violence cases, to follow so that the parties would not rush to the High Court.

¶61

(l)The Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class which are dealing with the cases liled seekiug various kinds of reliefs as laid down under Sections LB to 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2OOS should take

¶62

'zors(z)aro^{(crt.) uon (ap)} '^{zors(z)aro (c.t.) azo(ep)}

Dr.CSL, J C.rlPNo.5840 of 2022

¶67

I I I i I I I I

¶68

note of the fact that the proceedings therein are more civil in nature.

¶69

(2fWhen the aggrieved person or a protection Oflicer or any other person on behalf of the aggrieved person presents an application seeking one or more reliefs that are enshrined under Sections 1g to 22 of the protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2OO5, upon service of notice as required under Section 13 of the said Act and upon Eakilrg appearance by the opposite party i.e., respoadents therein either in person or through their counsel, the Court shall not insist for their personal appearance for each and every adjournment.

¶70

(3fThe Courts dealiag with the cases uader the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2OOS shall not even insist for filing an application uuder Section 317 Cr.p.C.

¶71

(afThe persons against whom the applications are filed seeking relief in domestic violence cases i.e., the respondents, however, shaU appear in person if a specific direction is given for their personal appearance by the Court during the course of proceedings.

¶72

(5)The points enumerated above does not however apply during the course of proceedings that are conducted under Section

¶73

¶74

D..CSL, J CrlPNo-Sa4O of 2022

¶75

¶76

31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2OO5.

¶77

(6) Last but most important is that the Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class which are eEpowered to deal urith the matters under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2OO5 shall make all endeavour to dispose of the applications frled for grant of various reliefs that are provided under Sections 18 to 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2OO5 within a period of sixty (6()) days from the date of first hearing, as required under Section 12(5f ofthe said Act.

¶78