MOHD. HUSSAIN Vs. SHABNAM ARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the application filed by the respondent against him under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "the D.V. Act"), which is stated to be pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajouri (hereinafter referred to as "the Magistrate").

(2.) As per the case of the petitioner, he entered into contract of marriage with the respondent and after a few months, she left her matrimonial house along with household articles with the help of other family members and did not return to her matrimonial house. It is submitted that the petitioner has filed a complaint against the respondent, her father and brother and in this regard an FIR stands registered in Police Station, Darhal. According to the petitioner, in order to counter the said FIR, the respondent in connivance with her family members has filed the impugned application under Sec. 12 of the D.V. Act. An interim order under Sec. 23 of the D.V. Act came to be passed by the learned Magistrate, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay interim maintenance of Rs.8000.00 per month to the respondent. It has been submitted that the petitioner filed his detailed objections to the application filed by the respondent and when the learned Magistrate obtained domestic incident report from the Protection Officer, it was revealed that no incident of domestic violence had taken place against the respondent. It has further been submitted that after getting domestic incident report and recording statement of the respondent, ex-parte interim order was cancelled by the learned Magistrate in terms of his order dtd. 3/6/2022.

(3.) It is submitted that the impugned application filed by the respondent against the petitioner is abuse of the process of law, inasmuch as, no incident of domestic violence has even, prima facie, taken place against the respondent. It is submitted that once interim order of monetary compensation has been cancelled by the learned Magistrate, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. It has been contended that because the respondent never resided with the petitioner, as such, there was no domestic relationship between the parties, as such, impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.