IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF AUGUST 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4353/2017 BETWEEN:
1. SMT.DODDAMMA WIFE OF M.GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 2. SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY SON OF M.GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.507, 2ND CROSS MUTHYAL NAGAR MATHIKERE BENGALURU 3. SRI MUNIRAJU SON OF M.GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 4. SMT.VANITHA DAUGHTER OF M.GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS PETITIONER NOS.1, 3 AND 4 ARE RESIDING AT NO.17, M.M.ROAD MUNIMARAPPA GARDEN NANDIDURGA CROSS BENSON TOWN BENGALURU – 560 046. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI JANARDHANA G., ADV.) AND:
1. SRI PREMALATHA WIFE OF THE LATE G.CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 2. KUM.LAKSHMI C. ALIAS DEEKSHA DAUGHTER OF THE LATE G.CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 3 YEARS 7 MONTHS THE RESPONDENT NO.2 BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN THE RESPONDENT NO.1 BOTH RESIDING AT NO.1101, 4TH MAIN M.C.LAYOUT VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 040. ...RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL.MISC.NO.147/2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF V-M.M.T.C., BANGALORE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. The petitioners are respondents in the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short ‘the Act’).
2. The short question of law raised by the petitioners herein is, they do not fall under the definition clause of Section 2(f) and (q) of the Act. The petition is filed by the respondents who are widow and children of deceased Gangaiah. The respondents are the widow and daughter of deceased Chandrashekar who is the son of 1st petitioner and brother of petitioners 2 to 4.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the very taking of the cognizance by the Trial Court is erroneous since at no point of time either these petitioners shared common shelter with respondents nor in law they are obliged to answer the claim of the petitioners.
4. On the showing of the petitioners itself, the petition is of the year 2015. In response to the notice of the Court, they have appeared before the Court and filed their objection statement, cross examined PWs and the respondents evidence has begun. The trial since is at the fag end, there is no reason to interfere at this stage. The question of law raised in this petition shall be urged by them at the primary level, that is trial court holding enqury.
With this observation, the petition is rejected. All the contentions are kept open.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.1/17 does not survive for consideration and accordingly the same stands disposed of.
Dvr:
Sd/- JUDGE