CHENTHAMARA Vs. MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this revision petition is to the judgment in Crl.A No.183/2015 of Court of Session, Palakkad. Revision petitioners are the respondents in M.C.No.39/2012 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court III, Palakkad which was a petition filed under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short 'DV Act, 2005'). The said M.C was filed by the petitioner contending that respondents 1 to 5 in the M.C who are her in-laws tried to oust her from the shared household and also caused obstruction to her and her children from entering the shared household and their peaceful residence therein.

(2.) Respondents in M.C resisted the petition contending that there were no acts of domestic violence as alleged; that after the death of her husband, petitioner is residing at her parental house and she never used to visit the matrimonial home and therefore, she is not an aggrieved person and there was no domestic relationship as defined under the DV Act, 2005 and she is not entitled to the relief sought under the DV Act.

(3.) After trial, the learned Magistrate dismissed the M.C. on a finding that the petitioner in M.C failed to prove that there was any domestic relationship between her and the respondents; that she failed to establish that she is an 'aggrieved person' as defined in the DV Act, 2005. Against the order in M.C.No.39/2012, the petitioner preferred appeal as Crl.A No.183/2015 before the Sessions Court, Palakkad. The said appeal was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge and the respondents in M.C were restrained from committing any acts of domestic violence against the petitioner and her children. Respondents in M.C. were also restrained from causing any obstruction to the petitioner and her children from entering the shared household and their peaceful living in the shared household.