LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-493

N.VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. S.GEETHA

Decided On January 10, 2013
N.VIJAYAKUMAR Appellant
V/S
S.GEETHA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the proceedings in Cr.M.P. No. 2933 of 2009, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. V, Madurai, as against the petitioners herein. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent herein married the first petitioner in the year 2002 and she got separated in the year 2005. But, the application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was filed only in the year 2009, when there was no domestic relationship at all between the respondent and the first petitioner herein. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that in the petition filed by the respondent before the trial Court, apart from showing her husband as first respondent, she also unnecessarily included the other family members viz., father-in-law, mother-in-law and also unmarried sister-in-law, as the respondents and no specific allegations are made against them. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that even as per Section 2(q) of the Act, only male members can be shown as respondents and not female members. The petition filed by the respondent herein before the trial Court is also not in Form No. II, as per Rule 6 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules").

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that as per the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in R. Nivendran and five Others v. Nivasnini Mohan @ M. Nivashini, 2010 2 MadLJ(Cri) 637and the decision of the Supreme Court in Sandhya Manoj Wankhade v. Manoj Bhimaro Wankhadf, 2011 CrLJ 1687, it is well settled that the female members also can be included as the respondents in the application filed by a women under Section 12 of the Act. Learned counsel further submitted that filing an application as per Form II is not a mandatory one as per Rule 6(i) of the Rules. Learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that as per Section 2(a) of the Act, an aggrieved person means any women who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent and as such, the respondent has filed an application under Section 12 of the Act.

(3.) This Court considered the submissions and perused the records.