SANTOSH MALHOTRA Vs. VED PRAKASH MALHOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed in a disposed of matter by the applicant-wife who has been dragging her husband and two sons into different legal battles for claiming maintenance from them and against whom this Court had recently on 18 th May, 2012 while dismissing one of her petitions(being Crl. M. C. No.3948/2008) filed by her against her husband observed as under:-

(2.) Now the brief facts leading to the filing of the present application by the petitioner-wife may be noticed. During the pendency of the proceedings against the respondent husband under various sections of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 initiated by the applicant-wife learned Metropolitan Magistrate passed an order directing the Protection Officer to let out the second floor portion of respondent's house in Kirti Nagar so that there could be some rental income which could be shared by the petitioner wife also. Feeling aggrieved by that direction the respondent filed a revision petition in which he succeeded and the aforesaid direction of the trial Court was set aside. This time, the applicant-wife felt aggrieved and she approached this Court for quashing of the Sessions' Court order by filing a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.(being Crl. M.C. No. 2386/ 2010). That petition was, however, dismissed on 4 th January, 2012 when one of the submissions made on behalf of the respondent-husband was that the second floor portion of his house could not be directed to be let out as whenever his children come to his house they require that portion to stay there.

(3.) After the dismissal of the petition of the applicant she moved the present application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. alleging that the respondent had deliberately made a false statement that whenever his children come to Delhi they require some place to stay and except for the second floor, which was sought to be let out, there was no other place to accommodate them. However, thereafter the respondent went ahead and rented the second floor to some tenant and, therefore, he should be proceeded against under Section 340 Cr.P.C.