Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ravinder And Ors vs Diksha on 29 August, 2023
2023:PHHC:113691
CR-4976-2023(O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr. No.127
Case No. : CR-4976-2023(O&M)
Date of Decision : August 29, 2023
Ravinder and others .... Petitioners
vs.
Diksha .... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH.
* * *
Present : Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate
for the petitioners.
* * *
GURBIR SINGH, J. :
1. Prayer in this Civil Revision petition filed under Article 227 of
the Constitution of India is for quashing the complaint i.e. Criminal
Complaint No.08 dated 13.01.2021 (Annexure P-1) titled as Diksha Vs.
Ravinder and others, filed by the respondent against the petitioners, under
Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
(hereinafter referred to as - the Act), as well as interim maintenance order
dated 22.02.2022 (Annexure P-2), passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Bhiwani (for brevity - Trial Court), along with all subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom.
2. The facts, as culled out from the paper book, are that the
marriage of respondent was solemnized on 13.12.2018 with Hariom (since
deceased) son of petitioners no.1 and 2 and brother of petitioner no.3. Out
of this wedlock, a female child was born. The respondent used to cause
MONIKA
2023.09.01 16:32
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
2023:PHHC:113691
CR-4976-2023(O&M) -2-
mental agony, physical torture and tension to the petitioners. On
22.03.2019, prior to the occasion of Gangaur, she took all gold and silver
ornaments which were given to her by the petitioners in her marriage. Even
a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- was paid by petitioner no.1 to his son Hariom,
deceased husband of the respondent.
3. On 05.06.2019, the respondent called her brother to her house
and went to her parental home along with her brother taking away her
clothes etc. Thereafter, Hariom and all the petitioners went there to bring
her back and various Panchayats were also convened but she refused to join
the company of Hariom unless the land was transferred in her name. On
26.07.2020, Hariom met with an accident and succumbed to his injuries on
31.07.2020. Even then, the respondent did not come to see her husband.
Since 05.06.2019, she has been residing at her parental home and there is no
relation between the parties. Petitioners no.1 and 2 also disowned their son
Hariom and the respondent as they got separated from the couple in the year
2019 and started living in a separate house.
4. In order to further harass the petitioners, respondent filed a
petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (Annexure P-1), a Civil Suit for
declaration and also lodged an FIR bearing No.257 dated 28.04.2021, under
Sections 323, 498-A, 406, 506, 34 IPC, 1860, at Police Station Bhiwani
Sadar, District Bhiwani. During investigation, petitioner no.3 was found
innocent.
5. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the
petitioners that vide order dated 22.02.2022 passed by the learned Trial
MONIKA
Court, it has been directed that a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month be paid as
2023.09.01 16:32
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
2023:PHHC:113691
CR-4976-2023(O&M) -3-
interim maintenance to the respondent, which is totally wrong and illegal as
the act and conduct of respondent herself amounted to mental and physical
cruelty to the petitioners. She used to live separately from the petitioners.
False allegations have been levelled against the petitioners. Even no single
instance of assault, maltreatment, stalking or any other crime has been
alleged against the petitioners in the complaint. There are no specific
allegations of harassment or cruelty. So, the complaint does not fall within
the ambit of domestic violence. The respondent was not residing with the
petitioners in a shared household. The residential house is exclusively
owned by petitioners no.1 and 2 and respondent cannot be considered to be a
member of the joint family. Petitioners no.1 and 2 are old-aged parents and
petitioner no.3 is brother of her late husband. All of them have been falsely
implicated with an oblique motive to wreak vengeance. The complaint in
question is based on stale and bald allegations and it is a bundle of lies. So,
no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings pending.
Reliance has been placed on a judgment in Anoop Singh and others vs.
Vani Shree reported as 2015(2) RCR (Civil) 1035 and also on another
judgment passed in Koli Babi Sarojni vs. KolliJayalaxmi reported as
2015(1) RCR (Criminal) 662 (A.P.). In these circumstances, it has been
prayed that the complaint filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the
Act, be quashed.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the
case file.
7. There is no dispute that the respondent/complainant was
MONIKA
married to the son of petitioners no.1 and 2 and brother of petitioner no.3.
2023.09.01 16:32
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
2023:PHHC:113691
CR-4976-2023(O&M) -4-
She has sought "Right to reside in a shared household" under Section 17 of
the Act, "Protection orders" under Section 18 of the Act, "Residence
orders" under Section 19 of the Act, "Monetary Reliefs" under Section 20 of
the Act and "Compensation Orders" under Section 22 of the Act. The
learned Trial Court has already passed the interim maintenance order, vide
order dated 22.02.2022 (Annexure P-2). An appeal has also been filed
against the said order by petitioner no.1. In a petition moved under Section
12 of the Act, it becomes duty of the Court to provide effective protection to
the rights of a woman, who is a victim of violence of any kind occurring
within the family. In the case in hand, the petitioners are family members of
deceased husband of the respondent/complainant. Whether there is any act
of violence or not, it is a question of evidence and the same can only be
decided after leading evidence. The learned Trial Court passed the order of
interim maintenance and the same is under challenge before the Appellate
Court. Every woman has a right to file a complaint and a complaint can
only be quashed if it amounts to an abuse of process of the Court. Learned
counsel for the petitioners has failed to explain as to how filing of the instant
complaint by the respondent is an abuse of process of the Court. The
respondent/complainant has exercised her right to take recourse of law and
there is nothing on the file at this stage, whereby the complainant can be
non-suited.
8. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case, I do not find any merit in this revision petition and the same is
accordingly dismissed in limine. However, nothing stated herein above shall
MONIKA
be considered as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
2023.09.01 16:32
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
2023:PHHC:113691
CR-4976-2023(O&M) -5-
9. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of along with
this judgment.
August 29, 2023 (GURBIR SINGH)
monika JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No.
Whether reportable ? Yes/No.
MONIKA
2023.09.01 16:32
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
