N.PRASAD Vs. HARITHALAKSHMI
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings initiated under the Domestic Violence Act in D.V.C.No.186 of 2017 on the file of the Mahila Court, Allikulam, Chennai.
(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the respondent herein and they got married on 27.11.2011 under the Hindu rites and customs. Due to their wed lock, they gave birth to a female child on 17.11.2012. Thereafter unfortunately, there was a misunderstanding between the petitioner and the respondent and as such, the respondent left the matrimonial home and went to her parents home in the month of July, 2014. Thereafter, in the year 2015, the petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in O.P.No.3110 of 2015 on the file of the III Additional Family Court, Chennai. The respondent also appeared in the divorce proceedings and filed her counter on 22.08.2016. In fact, she also filed a petition in O.P.No.3796 of 2016 for restitution of conjugal rights. He further submitted that the respondent lived along with the petitioner only about 100 days and thereafter she left the matrimonial home and stayed at her parents house.
2.1. The learned counsel further submitted that in the counter filed in the divorce petition as well as the petition for restitution of conjugal rights, there is absolutely no allegations as against the family members, and now the respondent filed this present complaint under Domestic Violence Act. Therefore, it is nothing but counter complaint to escape from the legal proceedings filed by the petitioner herein. She also impleaded other family members under Domestic Violence Act, and they were no way connected in this case and also no relief sought for against them, under the Domestic Violence Act. Therefore it is nothing but clear abuse of process of law and only to harass the petitioner and his family members, the respondent instituted this case.
2.2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submitted that the present complaint was filed on 11.05.2017 before the Protection Officer under the Domestic Violence Act, after three years from the date on which the respondent left from the matrimonial home. In fact, she left the matrimonial home in the month of July, 2014 and thereafter she lodged this present complaint that too after filing the petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Hence the present complaint is barred by limitation, since it was filed after three years from the date on which, the respondent left the matrimonial home. The domestic violence complaint has been filed after the lapse of one year 10 months. Therefore it is barred by limitation and the learned Magistrate ought not to have been taken cognizance under the Domestic Violence Act. Therefore, he prayed for quashment of this proceeding.
(3.) Heard Mr.P.K.Rajagobal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Though notice served to the respondent, no one is appeared on behalf of her.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.