Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022 – Karnataka High court – Allegations made against the maternal uncle of the husband are untrue in the act of Domestic Violence. Case Quashed.

Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022 Karnataka High court – Allegations made against the maternal uncle of the husband are untrue in the act of Domestic Violence. DV Criminal Case Quashed.

Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022 – Karnataka High court – Allegations made against the maternal uncle of the husband are untrue in the act of Domestic Violence. DV Criminal Case Quashed.
 Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022

Read More Judgements on DV Criminal Case Quashed


Khandu @ Khandoba S/O Sadashiva vs Smt.Mala W/O Krishna Mokashi on 10.01.2022

Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022 – In this article, the Karnataka High court has held that the allegations made against the maternal uncle of the husband are untrue and don’t attract the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act. It was stated that the maternal uncle who is the only petitioner in this case has caused abuse to the wife on a particular day which does not amount to an offence under the Domestic Violence Act. Therefore, the Karnataka High court quashed the criminal case against the petitioner.


Case Brief - Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022

The husband and wife got married according to their rituals and customs. The relationship between the husband and the wife was going on smoothly initially unless one-day problems started to bud in between them.

Their relationship turning sore became the reason for filing this complaint on 19.12.2012 and led to the initiation of the criminal proceedings, in which the only allegation made against the present petitioner is that he had caused abuse to the wife on a particular day, for the reason of preparation of food, except this statement there is nothing that is forthcoming in the complaint. The allegations made are for the offences punishable under the Domestic violence Act, 2005.
The contents made in the complaint cannot link the petitioner to the alleged offences punishable under the Domestic violence Act, being the maternal uncle, as is narrated in the complaint. Therefore, permitting any proceedings against the petitioner to continue would be an abuse of the process of law.

_________________________________________
Read judgement on Domestic Violence 22.07.2020 - Bald statements without any specific details against the distant relatives. Petition Dismissed.

Read 10 Tips to Counter Claim of Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. when life leaves the husband without any reasonable cause and maintenance can be denied.
__________________________________________________________________________________

Referred Cases – Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022

1. Geeta Mehrotra and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh

In this case, the question of territorial jurisdiction was just one of the grounds for quashing the proceedings along with the other grounds and, therefore, the High Court examined whether the prosecution case was fit to be quashed on other grounds or not.

In this case, when the brother and unmarried sister of the husband approached the High Court for quashing the proceedings initiated against them, on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction and also on the ground that no case was made out against them even if the allegations were taken at the face value. No offence was conducted as to attract the provisions under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC including Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

It was the legal duty of the High Court to examine whether there was prima facie evidence against the petitioners so that they could be directed to undergo the trial, besides the question of territorial jurisdiction. The High Court seems to have overlooked all the pleas that were raised before it and rejected the petition on the sole ground of territorial jurisdiction giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the trial court.

 

2. Rashmi Chopra vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Similar is the situation, in this case, there are allegations of overt act indicating the complicity of the family members named in the FIR, if the FIR as it does not disclose the specific allegations against the petitioners but is more so against the husband, especially in a matter arising out of the matrimonial dispute, it would be a clear abuse of the legal and judicial process to knowingly make the named accused in the FIR to undergo the trial.

Unless the FIR discloses specific allegations, which would convince the court to take cognizance of the offence alleged against the petitioners of the husband who are not found to have indulged in physical and mental torture of the wife. It is the well-settled principle laid down in cases, that if the FIR does not disclose the commission of an offence, the court would be justified in quashing the proceedings preventing the abuse of the process of law.

3. Ramesh v. State of Tamil Nadu

________________________________________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_______________________________________________________________________________


Court opinion - Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022

After going through the complaint, the High court’s view is that though we, deem it just and legally appropriate to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner as the FIR does not disclose any material evidence which could be held to be constituting an offence against the petitioner.

Therefore, we are pleased to quash and set aside the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Conclusion - Domestic Violence Quash Judgement 10.01.2022

In this article, the Karnataka High court has held that the aforesaid case that is before the Hon'ble Apex Court concerning the complainant who has dragged the distant maternal uncle of the husband into a proceeding which is primarily against the husband.

Therefore, in the light of the facts obtained in the present case and the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court as afore quoted, this petition deserves to succeed as allowing the conduct of the trial against the petitioner would result in a miscarriage of justice.


Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram
Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights


WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment