P.R. SURESH BABU Vs. B.S. BHARATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in C. Misc. No. 861/2010 on the file of V Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Bangalore, which is filed by the respondent herein under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Respondent was issued with notice by this Court. In spite of service of notice on 25.3.2014, she remained absent before this Court. (served notice perused)

(3.) I have carefully perused the records. The records disclose that, respondent (wife) filed C. Misc. case No. 91/2009, on the file of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Tiptur, under the Domestic Violence Act, seeking several reliefs under Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the said Act, making several allegations against the petitioner. That petition was filed on 5.2.2009. For the reasons best known to her, she filed a memo before the said Court on 9.2.2009 and sought for withdrawal of the said case. She has categorically stated in the memo that, the matter was settled between the parties. Therefore, she has sought for dismissal of the complaint. Hence, it appears that the said petition was dismissed as not pressed. The records also disclose that, she also filed another petition in C. Misc. No. 26/2010 before the JMFC (Sr. Dn.), Tiptur, under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, on 4.5.2009 and the said case according to the learned counsel is still pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner with all certainty submitted before this Court that, as on today, he enquired with the petitioner and came to know that the said case in C. Misc. No. 26/ 2010 is still pending before the Tiptur Court. On perusal of the averments made in the petition in C. Misc. No. 26/2010, the respondent herein has filed the said petition under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the Domestic Violence Act, for several reliefs, particularly for separate residence, monitory relief etc.