CHANDAN KUMAR SAHOO & ORS Vs. PUTUL SAHOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision has been preferred by the petitioners under Section 401 read with 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of the proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 being Misc. Case No. 92/2018 pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court at Tamluk.

(2.) It was submitted by Ms. Minoti Gomes, the learned advocate for the petitioners that the proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 brought out by the opposite party no.2 against the petitioners is not maintainable since there was no existence of marital relations either with her husband or the other family members of the petitioner no.1namely the present petitioners since the year 2010 when she lodged the complaint against them before the Magistrate under section 498A IPC. She also submitted that in the year 2011 opposite party No.2 brought out one application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. praying for maintenance and the maintenance was granted in her favour and the husband (Petitioner no.1) is regularly paying the maintenance which the opposite party no.2 has suppressed in her application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

(3.) Ms. Gomes further submitted that in the year 2010 opposite party no.2 lodged a complaint against the petitioners before the learned CJM, Purba Mednipur alleging cruelty under section 498A IPC which the learned Magistrate found the charge against the petitioners not sustainable and acquitted them. But in spite of that and after a long gap of eight years opposite party no.2 has initiated the instant proceeding under Domestic Violence Act, 2005 over the self same facts. According to Ms. Gomes, initiation of proceeding under Domestic Violence Act with an identical allegations, from which petitioners were acquitted, after a long time without any satisfactory explanation for such inordinate delay is not maintainable and such proceeding is abuse of process of law and is liable to be quashed.