This petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the proceedings in D.V.C.No.2 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani and to quash the same.
2.Heard Mr.C.Ramkumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.SP.Yuaraj, learned counsel for the respondents.
3.The main grievance of the first respondent/de-facto complainant seems to be only against her husband, who is arrayed as A1 in the Domestic Violence case and he is not the petitioner in the present case. While that being so, the petitioners herein are the in-laws of the first respondent, namely, the first petitioner is the mother-in-law, the petitioners 2 to 4 are the sisters-in-laws and the petitioners 5 to 7 are the distant relatives of the first respondent's husband.
4.On a perusal of the complaint, it is seen that the first respondent had mainly sought for the following reliefs, namely, return of sreedhana articles, monthly maintenance and compensation. I am unable to comprehend as to how these reliefs can be made out as against these petitioners who are the relatives of A1/husband and how the Court below can direct them to pay compensation. The relief of return of the sreedhana articles, monthly maintenance and lumpsum compensation can be made as against her husband alone. It is further seen that the petitioners 2 to 4 are all married and are residing away from the matrimonial house of the first respondent herein. The fifth petitioner herein is the distant relative of the first accused/husband and the overt act attributed against this petitioner may not constitute the acts of domestic violence as prescribed under Domestic Violence Act. The same applies to the petitioners 6 & 7 also, wherein the allegations cannot be deemed to be an act of domestic violence for the purpose of maintaining the reliefs sought for by the first respondent.
5.It is pertinent to note that the grievance of the first respondent/defacto complainant seems to be only against her husband, who is allegedly having an illicit affair with some other lady. If at all, the first respondent is aggrieved against her husband's conduct, it is always open to her to proceed against her husband. The fact remains that, the act of roping in all the in-laws in the domestic violence proceedings, can only be concluded as an act to wreak vengeance against her husband's family members. In the absence of any acts of domestic violence made out as against the petitioners herein, it would not be appropriate to make the petitioners to undergo an ordeal of trial.
6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, the proceedings as against the petitioners herein in D.V.C.No.2 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani is quashed. It is made clear that the proceedings as against the first accused/husband of the first respondent shall continue. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
27.11.2017 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No DP/cgi To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Bhavani.
2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.
M.S.RAMESH.J, DP Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos.10810, 10811 and 14919 of 2017 27.11.2017