PUNEM SRINIVAS RAO Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed to grant the following relief:

(2.) Third respondent is the wife of first petitioner. Fourth respondent is the daughter of third respondent. Petitioner Nos 2 and 3 are parents of first petitioner, in-laws of third respondent and grand parents of fourth respondent. Third respondent filed case under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short "the Act ") against the petitioners alleging demand of dowry, ill-treatment, harassment and also thrown out of the house with young child. She also filed petition to grant monetary relief under Section 20 of the Act. Order of prohibition under Section 18 from committing acts of domestic violence and to grant Rs.20,000/- under Section 20 of the Act to each of the petitioners per month for maintenance. In this writ petition, petitioners challenge the maintainability of DVC.No.653 of 2020 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Luxettipet.

(3.) According to learned counsel for the petitioners only bald allegations are levelled without any merit and this case is initiated only to harass and humiliate the petitioners. More particularly, petitioner Nos 2 and 3 are no way concerned with what is alleged as first petitioner and third respondent have been living separately. As first petitioner is a police officer in Special Police, he has to live in the quarters located in the concerned Battalion. Parents are not living with him and there was no occasion for parents of first petitioner behaving rudely against third respondent, ill-treating the third respondent and question of throwing third respondent out of the house does not arise. By pointing out to the various averments in D.V.C. learned counsel contends that these are all bald allegations, without any substance. Based on these bald allegations at least petitioner Nos 2 and 3 could not have been included and prays to set aside the D.V.C. proceedings against all petitioners and alternatively at least insofar as petitioner Nos 2 and 3 are concerned.