RAM SINGH Vs. MADHURI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cost as imposed vide order dated 25th July, 2016 has been paid to learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) A petition under Sections 12 and 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in short ' PWDV Act') was filed by the respondent before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate wherein the petitioner, who is the husband of the respondent, was summoned. Challenging the order dated 16th Oct., 2015 summoning the petitioner, the petitioner prefers the present petition.

(3.) The grounds urged by learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the order of summoning are that since the petitioner is a resident of Bihar, he could not have been summoned by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate without conducting an inquiry under Sec. 202 Crimial P.C. and the testimony of the complainant cannot be treated as an inquiry. It is further stated that having lived together for 42 years, the allegations of the complainant are false and no documents have been filed to support her allegations.