HARSUKHBHAI TRIBHUVANBHAI RAJPARA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners - Harsukhbhai Rajpara and Gopalbhai Rajpara are the father-in-law and the brother-in-law of the original complainant, respondent no. 2 herein. They have approached this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the complaint filed by respondent no. 2 Sangitaben alias Shrutiben Rajpara under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(2.) The original complainant - respondent no. 2 has filed a complaint under the Act against her husband Manishkumar Rajpara who is arraigned as accused no. 1 whereas the present applicants are arraigned as accused nos. 2 and 3. The complaint is annexed as Annexure 'A' to the petition. Evidently, the complaint is in a format as prescribed under the Act. According to the complainant Sangitaben, she married Manishkumar, son of applicant no. 1 in 1996. As a result of matrimonial disputes that arose between the two, various proceedings have been filed inter se between Manishkumar and Sangita, which need not be referred to herein.

(3.) At the outset, attention was drawn by Mr. D.J. Bhatt, learned advocate for the applicants that a contention was raised by him that since the Act came into force in Oct. 2006, it could not have retrospective effect and therefore the complaint under the Act was not maintainable. However, that point has not been pressed by Mr. Bhatt in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of V.D. Bhanot Vs. Savita Bhanot reported in 2012(3) SCC 183 wherein the Apex Court has held that application by a woman who had shared a household in pas but was no longer residing with her husband or who was subjected to any act of domestic violence prior to coming into force of the Act was maintainable.