Madras High Court
D.Chandralekha vs T.Anupriya ... 1St on 14 July, 2025
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
C.R.P.(MD)No.756 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14.07.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
C.R.P.[PD].(MD)No.756 of 2025
and
C.M.P.(MD)Nos.4003 & 4005 of 2025
1.D.Chandralekha
2.D.Saranya
3.Vinothkumar ...Petitioners/Respondents 2 to 4
Vs.
1.T.Anupriya ... 1st respondent/Petitioner
2.D.Arunkumar ...2nd Respondent/1st Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
India, to strike off the proceedings in D.V.C.No.1 of 2025, on the file of the
Additional Mahila Court (JM Level) Madurai by allowing this Civil Revision
Petition.
For Petitioners : Mr.V.Karuna
For R1 : Mr.R.Senthil Kumar
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking to strike off the impugned
proceedings in D.V.C.No.1 of 2025, pending before the Additional Mahila
Court (JM Level) Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/07/2025 02:44:50 pm )
2. The petitioners herein are the respondents 2 to 4 in D.V.C.No.1 of
2025, before the trial Court. The first respondent herein has filed D.V.C.No.1 of
2025, before the Additional Mahila Court (JM Level) Madurai, under the
provisions of the Domestic Violence Act and BNSS, 2023. Aggrieved against
the D.V.C.No.1 of 2025 filed by the first respondent against the petitioners, the
present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the
first petitioner is the mother-in-law, second petitioner is the sister-in-law and
the third petitioner is the husband of the sister-in-law of the first respondent.
He further submitted that the first respondent has initiated domestic violence
proceedings against her in-laws. It is submitted that the petitioners are in no
way connected with the allegations made by the first respondent in the DVC
case and though the second respondent is ready and willing to live with the first
respondent it is only the first respondent who is not coming to live with him and
has initiated the present case. The first respondent has made some allegations
against the petitioners and the third petitioner is the husband of the second
petitioner and he is no way connected with the allegations made against him.
On the basis of the general allegations, the third petitioner need not be faced the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/07/2025 02:44:50 pm )
trial. Accordingly, he prays for quashing the DVC case with regard to the third
petitioner. Further, he prays that the petitioners 1 & 2 may be permitted to
raise all the grounds mentioned herein before the trial court. He also requests
this Court to dispense with their personal appearance before the trial court.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also
considering the fact that the third petitioner is the husband of the second
petitioner and he is no way connected with the allegations made against him,
this Court is inclined to quash the D.V.C.No.1 of 2025 in respect of the third
petitioner. Accordingly, D.V.C.No.1 of 2025 as against the third petitioner is
quashed.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submits that if this
Court is inclined to dispense with the appearance of the petitioners 1 & 2, this
Court may impose requisite conditions to see to it that the presence of the
petitioners 1 & 2 at the times, during which the presence of the petitioners 1 &
2 is mandatory be safeguarded so that the petitioners 1 & 2 does not frustrate
the trial proceedings by dragging on the same to the detriment of the first
respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/07/2025 02:44:50 pm )
6.This Court, taking into consideration the submission made by the
learned counsel for the petitioners, permits the petitioner 1 & 2 to raise all the
grounds as raised herein before the trial court at the time of trial. Taking into
consideration the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners,
appearance of the petitioners 1 & 2 before the trial court is dispensed with
except for their appearance for the purpose of receiving the copy of the
proceedings u/s 230 of BNSS, framing of charges, questioning under Section
351 of BNSS and on the day on which judgment is to be pronounced. However,
if for any particular reason, the presence of the petitioners 1 & 2 is necessary,
the trial court, at its wisdom, shall direct them to appear on those days.
7.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed in respect of the
third petitioner and the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed in respect of the
petitioners 1 & 2. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
14.07.2025
Internet:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
am
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/07/2025 02:44:50 pm )
To
1.The Additional Mahila Court (JM Level),
Madurai.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/07/2025 02:44:50 pm )
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
am
14.07.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/07/2025 02:44:50 pm )
