The Bombay High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice S.S. Shinde and Justice Manish Pitale quashed criminal proceedings under provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act initiated by a mother against the daughter. (Vanisha v. XYZ & State of Maharashtra).
The bench noted that the allegation levelled by the mother against the daughter are exaggerated and her anger and bitterness arising from matrimonial discord with her husband, is leading to serious impediment in the progress of her own daughter.
Facts of the case
The mother had filed a complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate at Andheri, Mumbai under provisions of DV Act against her husband and their daughter. Assailing that, the daughter is seeking quashing of proceedings claiming that she is facing the ire of her mother due to matrimonial discord between her mother and her father.
Contention of the Parties
The Petitioner contended that she was unnecessarily made a party to the proceedings because she continued to reside with her father. The urgency for filing the proceedings was that the petitioner had completed her engineering course and wanted to undertake further studies in Australia which was to commence from May 2021 for which a declaration was required regarding pendency of criminal proceedings against the petitioner. Secondly, it was contended that the reliefs sought in the application were all maintainable only against the husband.
The mother, through her advocate M Moses, went against the plea expressing that the petitioner was covered under the meaning of 'Respondent' under the DV Act. It was guaranteed that the petitioner was not needed to travel to another country for examinations. The mother additionally decided to offer certain expressions about the personality of her girl that she has numerous sweethearts. On this premise, the Respondent looked for excusal of the writ appeal.
Courts observation & Judgment
The Court concurred with the applicant seeing that the little girl has been trapped in the "crossfire of sharpness and marital friction" between her parents and said that pendency of the case would be an obstacle for the candidate to acquire a Visa.
The Bench additionally saw from the proof set before it that "the single charge made against the candidate is an embellishment and it has emerged severely of the respondent (mother) against the applicant, as she kept on living with her dad".
The Court inferred that the charge evened out by the mother against the little girl is overstated and her annoyance and sharpness emerging from marital friction with her husband, is prompting genuine hindrance in the advancement of her own little girl, the petitioner.
The court concluded that The claims are 'absurd and characteristically far-fetched based on which no judicious individual could arrive at an equitable resolution that there is adequate ground for continuing against the blamed,
It, accordingly, quashed the procedures started by the mother against the little girl.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :