SANJAY SINGH THAKUR Vs. SMT. URMILA THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by applicant for quashment of proceedings of M.J.C.No.R/00396/2014 pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jabalpur under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that marriage of applicant No.1 was solemnised with Respondent on 2.5.2002 and out of their wedlock they were blessed with a son who was born on 21.10.2005. Applicants No.2 and 3 are parents and applicant No. 4 and 5 are brothers of the applicant No.1. The respondent left the house of the applicant No.1 in the year 2008-09 and was residing with her parents. She has also left her son who is residing with applicant No.1. Despite of all efforts made for restitution of conjugal rights, respondent did not come back, therefore, applicant No.1 filed a petition for divorce before Family Court. The Family Court, Jabalpur has passed a decree of divorce on 28.2.2009 in favour of applicant No.1. Respondent has also filed petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for maintenance and as per order of the Court, applicant no.1 is paying Rs.1500/- per month as maintenance to Respondent and relationship with the Respondent as wife was ceased after getting decree of divorce. There was no domestic relationship with the Respondent. However, on 14.5.2014 she has moved an application under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act for every relief which can be granted under the Act. But in the application there are no specific averments disclosing time, date, place, and particulars of the incident of the act of domestic violence against any of the applicants. The application is vague and filed just to take revenge from the applicants after six years of voluntary separation.

(3.) Learned trial Court without considering the infirmities in the application, took cognizance mechanically. Apparently, the application has been filed with malicious intention as a counter blast of proceedings of divorce and just to take revenge. The applicants No.2 and 4 have also been arrayed as the Respondents to create pressure on the applicant No.1. Apart from it, after passing of the decree of divorce, there was no domestic relationship between the applicant No.1 and the Respondent. Hence, no case for domestic violence is made out and no cognizance can be taken for proceedings against the applicants under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Hence, the proceedings be quashed.