Mohd Vikar Shareif And Another vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1922 Tel

           THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
               CRIMINAL PETITION No.3530 of 2022
ORDER:

The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Code'') to quash the

proceedings in D.V.C. No.79 of 2020 on the file of IV Metropolitan

Magistrate, Hyderabad. The petitioners herein are respondents in the

said DVC. The said DVC is filed by respondent No.3 herein under

Section - 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,

2005 (for short 'Act, 2005') against the petitioners seeking various

reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant

Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 - State.

Perused the record.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the

petitioners herein never harassed the 3rd respondent as alleged by her in

the complaint. The 3rd respondent falsely implicated the petitioners in

the present case. He would further submit that 1st petitioner is husband

of the 2nd respondent and the 2nd petitioner is aged mother of R-1. There

are no allegations, much less specific allegations against the 2nd

petitioner herein. In view of the same, he sought to quash the

proceedings in the said DVC by dispensing with their presence before

the trial Court.

4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor

would submit that there are specific allegations made against the

petitioners by the 3rd respondent in the complaint filed under Section -

12 of the Act, 2005 and that the petitioners shall co-operate in

concluding the trial before the Court below. In view of the same, he

sought to dismiss the present petition.

5. As per the contents of the petition filed under Section - 12

of the Act, 2005, the marriage of 1st petitioner/R-1 with the 3rd

respondent was performed on 10-09-2012. Thereafter, petitioners

herein started harassing the 3rd respondent.

6. In this regard, it is apt to refer to the decision rendered by a

learned Single Judge of High Court of Judicature for the States of

Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in Giduthuri Kesari Kumar v. State of

Telangana1, which is as under:

                  "14)     To sum up the findings:



    . 2015 (2) ALD (Crl.) 470 (AP)


     i)      Since the remedies under D.V. Act are

civil remedies, the Magistrate in view of his powers under Section 28(2) of D.V Act shall issue notice to the parties for their first appearance and shall not insist for the attendance of the parties for every hearing and in case of non-appearance of the parties despite receiving notices, can conduct enquiry and pass exparte order with the material available. It is only in the exceptional cases where the Magistrate feels that the circumstance require that he can insist the presence of the parties even by adopting coercive measures.

ii) In view of the remedies which are in civil nature and enquiry is not a trial of criminal case, the quash petitions under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. on the plea that the petitioners are unnecessarily arrayed as parties are not maintainable. It is only in exceptional cases like without there existing any domestic relationship as laid under Section 2(f) of the D.V. Act between the parties, the petitioner filed D.V. case against them or a competent Court has already acquitted them of the allegations which are identical to the ones leveled in the Domestic Violence Case, the respondents can seek for quashment of the proceedings since continuation of the proceedings in such instances certainly amounts to abuse of process of Court."

7. In the present case, the petitioner No. 2 herein is aged

mother of R-1. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

1st petitioner herein underwent surgery and in proof of the same, he has

filed medical reports. Therefore, it is difficult for them to attend the

Court on each date of hearing.

8. Considering the said facts and also in view of the principle

laid down in the above judgment, this Court is inclined to dispense with

the presence of the petitioners in the DVC proceedings.

9. In view of the above discussion, the present Criminal

Petition is disposed of, dispensing with personal appearance of the

petitioners herein/R-1 and R-2 in D.V.C. No.79 of 2020 on the file of IV

Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

10. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the

Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

__________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J Date: 18.04.2022 dv