P.K. Lohra, J. - (1.) Petitioners have laid this criminal misc. petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashment of complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, 'Act of 2005') filed by second respondent-wife.
(2.) It is, inter-alia, averred in the petition that complainant entered into matrimony with Hitesh Sharma on 25th of February, 1994 and soon thereafter a matrimonial dispute cropped up between the spouses, which to led filing of complaint at the behest of second respondent against her husband, Hitesh Sharma, for offence under Sections 498A, 323, 406 and 504 IPC on 17th of October, 2010, who passed away during pendency of the same. Apart from that, the complainant also submitted a complaint against petitioners and her husband under Section 12 of the Act, 2005. In the complaint, petitioners No. 1 & 2, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant respectively, were also arrayed and petitioner No.3, who is sister-in-law, was also impleaded as a party. In the original complaint, husband was also impleaded, however due to his death complaint against him abetted. By relying on the averments contained in the complaint, wherein she has categorically stated that she was forced to leave matrimonial home on 12th June, 1995, petitioners have pleaded in the petition that no case for domestic violence against the petitioners is made out within the four corners of Section 12 of the Act of 2005. Specific contention of the petitioners is that since 1995, the respondent-complainant is not living with petitioners, and therefore, the allegation of perpetrating domestic violence by them against her is per se a false and concocted fact and in case the proceedings in the matter are allowed to be continued, the same would result in miscarriage of justice. It is also pleaded in the petition that by entertaining the complaint of second respondent, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara (for short, 'learned trial Court') has abused the process of the Court, and therefore, inherent powers are to be exercised for quashing the complaint itself.
(3.) The petition is pending since 2011. On 26th of November, 2012, the Court was pleased to admit petition and requisitioned the record. Later on, vide order dated 27th of April, 2013, further proceedings in Complaint Case No.14/2010, pending before the learned trial Court, were stayed.;