[ad_1]
Bombay High Court
Santosh Pandurang Gurav @ Santosh … vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 9 July, 2025
2025:BHC-AS:29152
1/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3087 OF 2022
Santosh Pandurang Gurav
@ Santosh Pandurang Kadam,
Age - 45 years, occupation - Service, .... Petitioner
R/at.902, Solitaire A, Kolshet Road,
Everest Word, PO Sandozbaugh,
Thane (W), Pin - 400 607.
Versus
(1) The State of Maharashtra;
(2) Janhvi Sachin Kadam, .... Respondents
Age - Adult, Occupation-Service,
R/at.B/30, Swapna Safulay CHS,
25th Road, Bandra (W),
Mumbai - 400 050.
.....
Mrs.Gulestan M. Dubash, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr.Avinash D. Kamkhedkar, APP for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr.S.B. Bhatagunaki, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
.....
CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
DATED : 09.07.2025
JUDGMENT :
1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
Digitally
signed by
RAJESHRI
2. Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent
RAJESHRI PRAKASH
PRAKASH AHER
AHER Date:
2025.07.16
11:43:43
of parties.
+0530
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on - 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
2/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
3. The Petitioner by invoking Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) and Article 227 of the Constitution
of India is seeking to quash and set aside the complaint filed by
Respondent No.2 under the provisions of Protection of Women
From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as,
“D.V.Act”, for short), pending before the Metropolitan
Magistrate 12th Court at Bandra, Mumbai, against the Petitioner.
The Petitioner is also seeking quashment of order of issuance of
notice/summons/process dated 21.03.2022, against him.
4. The Petitioner is Respondent No.3 in the application filed
by Respondent No.2 under Sections 12, 18, 19, 30 22 and 23 of
the D.V. Act. The complaint has been filed by Respondent No.2
alleging Domestic violence against her husband, mother-in-law
and brother-in-law, respectively. The Petitioner is the brother-
in-law of Respondent No.2. A complaint is filed by Respondent
No.2 contending that after her marriage with Respondent No.1,
she was residing with Respondent No.1 at Bandra, Mumbai.
Respondent No.2 was blessed with two children. It is a specific
case that her husband, who is Respondent No.1 in the complaint
used to harass, abuse and assault her physically for demand of
dowry. Respondent Nos.2 and 3, i.e. the mother-in-law and the
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
3/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
present Petitioner used to support Respondent No.1. The
husband would often quarrel with the complainant on petty
issues. According to her she has given birth to two girl child, due
to which the Respondents were unhappy, as they wanted male
child. On that count also the Respondents used to taunt and
harass the complainant.
5. In 2001, her husband has forcibly taken away her
Stridhan. It is her allegation that the Respondent No.1 as stated
in the complaint has harassed her both mentally and physically
in her day to day live on petty issues. It is alleged that
Respondent No.1 husband used to quarrel and often used to beat
the complainant. He was supported by Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
The complainant has given an instance, when her father refused
to pay him Rs.3,00,000/-, to her husband, Respondent No.2 got
angry and physically assaulted the complainant, and also
threatened to kill her. She was thereafter thrown out of her
matrimonial home. It is further alleged that, the husband has
indulged in extra marital affair with a married lady having two
children. When she inquired about it with Respondent Nos.2 and
3, they did not pay any attention.
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on - 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
4/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
6. On the above premise complaint containing specific
allegations against the Respondent-husband has been filed by
Respondent No.2.
7. The learned advocate for the Petitioner submits that on
the aforementioned background of the complaint, she has
approached this Court invoking inherent powers under Section
482 of the Cr.P.C. alongwith the supervisory jurisdiction of this
Court under Article 227 of the Constitutions of India, to quash
and set aside the D.V. Proceedings filed by the Respondent No.2,
pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court, Bandra,
Mumbai.
8. It is submitted that after filing of complaint by Respondent
No.2, notice/summons have been issued against the Petitioner
alongwith the husband and mother-in-law of Respondent No.2.
On the background of issuance of notice he has approached this
Court with the prayer to quash and set aside the proceedings to
his extent. When the notice was issued in the matter on
25.08.2022, interim relief was granted in his favour. This Court
has directed to stay the proceedings against the Petitioner, till
the next date of hearing.
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on - 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
5/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
9. It is submitted by the Advocate for the Petitioner that he is
not residing nor has ever resided in common shelter with the
complainant. Upon reading of the entire complaint from the
averments, nothing is alleged against the Petitioner. He being
the brother-in-law of the complainant and has never resided in
the “Shared Household”. Therefore, no complaint under Section
2 of the DV Act is maintainable against him. According to the
learned Advocate Mr.Dubash, the Magistrate has committed an
error in issuing summons to the Petitioner since the Petitioner
has never resided at the address mentioned by Respondent No.2
in the cause title of the complaint.
10. It is submitted that even from the pleadings in the
complaint, it can be discerned that, the complainant and her
husband resided separately in a rented house. There is no
evidence in the complaint that Respondent No.2 has ever shared
household with the Petitioner. She has also not pleaded in her
Application that all family members were residing together in a
joint family. There was no domestic relationship between
Respondent No.2 and the Petitioner. It is submitted by the
Petitioner that neither there was “Shared Household” nor there
is any “Domestic Relationship”, as defined under Section 2(f) of
the D.V. Act.
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on - 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
6/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
11. She would further submit that the Petitioner does not fit in
the definition of ‘Respondent’, under Section 2(q) of the D.V. Act.
In order to attract provisions of the D.V. Act, it is necessary that
the Petitioner is a person in a ‘Domestic Relationship’ with the
complainant for attracting the definition for Respondent.
12. It is submitted by the learned Advocate Mr.Dubash that
there are no specific allegations against the Petitioner in the
complaint by Respondent No.2. The Petitioner is deliberately
added as a party to the complaint by Respondent No.2 only with
a intention to harass, who has nothing to do with the affairs of
Respondent No.2. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is
residing alongwith his family at Thane, on the address
mentioned in the title clause, since past many years. Hence, in
absence of specific allegations against him, more so in view of
the fact that there was no “Shared Household”, and “no
Domestic Relationship”, therefore, the complaint filed by
Respondent No.2 against him would not be maintainable. If the
complaint is not quashed and set aside, he would be subjected to
abuse of the process without any justifiable reason. Therefore, in
the interest of justice, and in order to prevent the abuse of
process of law. The complaint filed by Respondent No.2 deserves
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
7/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
to be quashed and set side by allowing the present Writ Petition.
13. Per contra, the learned Advocate Mr.S.B. Bhatagunaki,
appearing for Respondent No.2, has made a feeble attempt to
oppose the prayer made by the Petitioner by contending that
though the Petitioner was admittedly residing separately,
however, he used to visit the residence of his brother
intermittently and he would support his brother i.e. husband of
Respondent No.2. It is, therefore, prayed that prayer made by
the Petitioner does not deserve any consideration. Hence, the
Writ Petition be dismissed.
14. After hearing the respective parties and perusing the
complaint alongwith other documents placed on record, there
seems to be substance in the contention of the Petitioner. After
going through the complaint, there does not appear to be any
specific allegation made against the Petitioner. Except the
omnibus allegations regarding stray incidence wherein the
Petitioner alongwith his mother, is supposed to have supported
the husband of Respondent No.2.
15. For entertaining a complaint under Section 12 of the D.V.
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
8/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
Act, there has to be “Domestic Violence” or “Domestic Incident”.
“Domestic Violence”, is defined under Section 3 of the D.V. Act,
which reads thus:
“3. Definition of domestic violence.–For the purposes of
this Act, any act, omission or commission or conduct
of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in
case it–
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life,
limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the
aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes
causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and
emotional abuse and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved
person with a view to coerce her or any other person
related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any
dowry or other property or valuable security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or
any person related to her by any conduct mentioned
in clause (a) or clause (b); or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical
or mental, to the aggrieved person.
Explanation I.–For the purposes of this section,–
(i) “physical abuse” means any act or conduct which is of
such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm, or danger
to life, limb, or health or impair the health or
development of the aggrieved person and includes
assault, criminal intimidation and criminal force;
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
9/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
(ii) “sexual abuse” includes any conduct of a sexual
nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise
violates the dignity of woman;
(iii) “verbal and emotional abuse” includes–
(a) insults, ridicule, humiliation, name calling and
insults or ridicule specially with regard to not
having a child or a male child; and
(b) repeated threats to cause physical pain to any
person in whom the aggrieved person is
interested;
(iv) “economic abuse” includes–
(a) deprivation of all or any economic or financial
resources to which the aggrieved person is entitled
under any law or custom whether payable under an
order of a court or otherwise or which the
aggrieved person requires out of necessity
including, but not limited to, house hold necessities
for the aggrieved person and her children, if any,
stridhan, property, jointly or separately owned by
the aggrieved person, payment of rental related to
the shared house hold and maintenance;
(b) disposal of household effects, any alienation of
assets whether movable or immovable, valuables,
shares, securities, bonds and the like or other
property in which the aggrieved person has an
interest or is entitled to use by virtue of the
domestic relationship or which may be reasonably
required by the aggrieved person or her children or
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
10/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
her stridhan or any other property jointly or
separately held by the aggrieved person; and
(c) prohibition or restriction to continued access to
resources or facilities which the aggrieved person
is entitled to use or enjoy by virtue of the domestic
relationship including access to the shared
household.”
16. From the contents of the complaint made by Respondent
No.2, there is no incident or an act of either physical, sexual,
verbal, emotional abuse or economic abuse or any act of
harassment or injury endangering Respondent No.2 reflected
from the complaint. The words, “physical abuse”, sexual abuse”,
“verbal abuse”, and “economical abuse” have been explained in
Explanation (1). There is no allegation of any of the acts or
attributable to the present Petitioner.
17. The other necessary ingredient for entertaining the
complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act is that there has to be
“Domestic Relationship” between two persons. “Domestic
Relationship”, is defined under Section 2(f) of the DV Act, which
reads thus:
“2(f) “domestic relationship” means a relationship
Rajeshri Aher::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
11/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.docbetween two persons who live or have, at any point of
time, lived together in a shared household, when they
are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a
relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are
family members living together as a joint family;”
18. Considering that the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 have
never lived together or shared the same household, there does
not exists domestic relationship between the Petitioner and
Respondent No.2, which is also not disputed by the advocate
representing Respondent No.2. The other necessary ingredient
for filing complaint against a person under Section 12 of the DV
Act is the person against whom the complaint is filed is the
‘Respondent’ within the meaning of the Act. Therefore, only
such person who fits into the definition of “Respondent”, as
given in Section 2(q) of the DV Act can be made as a party
Respondent in the complaint. The definition of “Respondent”
reads thus:
“2(q) “respondent” means any adult male person who is,
or has been, in a domestic relationship with the
aggrieved person and against whom the aggrieved
person has sought any relief under this Act:
Provided that an aggrieved wife or female living in a
relationship in the nature of a marriage may also file a
Rajeshri Aher::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
12/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doccomplaint against a relative of the husband or the male
partner.”
19. From the above definition, provided under the DV Act, it is
evident that for institution of complaint under Section 12 of the
D.V. Act, unless the aforementioned ingredients are fulfilled, a
complaint for domestic violence cannot be filed. Even from the
pleadings in the complaint, it is evident that except omnibus
allegations, no specific allegations in respect of any specific
incident. There is nothing that would attract the provisions of
the D.V.Act to entertain the domestic violence complaint against
the present Petitioner. It is also worthwhile to note that
Respondent No.2 has not named the present Petitioner in the
FIR filed by her on 08.02.2022. This itself gives rise to the
obvious conclusion that the complaint under the D.V. Act has
been filed against the Petitioner deliberately, merely to cause
harassment to him. Considering that even if the complaint
proceeds, eventually, Respondent No.2 is not likely to succeed
in her complaint as regards her allegations made against the
Petitioner. Therefore, in my view, it would not be appropriate to
continue the abuse of process of law, as against the Petitioner.
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on - 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
13/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
20. This Court is aware about the word of caution expressed
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the recent judgment in the
case of Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi Vs. Vidhi Rawal1. Though the
Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the D.V. proceedings are
capable of being quashed by the High Courts in exercise of its
inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.. Though such
view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Hon’ble
Supreme Court has further issued a word of caution that such
powers for quashing of proceedings under the D.V. Act are to be
sparingly exercised considering that the D.V. Act, 2005 is a
welfare legislation specially enacted to give justice to the women
are subjected to Domestic violence and for preventing acts of
domestic violence. Unless there is a clear case of ‘gross illegality’
or ‘gross abuse of process of law’, such powers should not be
exercised. Keeping in mind the above word of caution, after
perusing the complaint, in my opinion, the complaint filed by
Respondent No.2 to the extent of Petitioner is devoid of any
substance since it is devoid of any specific allegations. More
particularly, in view of the absence of “Shared Household” and
“Domestic Relationship”, therefore, in order to prevent the
abuse of process of law, in my opinion, the D.V. proceedings filed
1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1158
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
14/14 15 cri wp. 3087 of 2022.doc
by Respondent No.2 to the extent of present Petitioner deserves
to be quashed and set aside.
21. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer
Clause (c), which read thus:
“c) This Hon’ble Court may kindly quash and set aside
C.C.No.39/DV/2022 u/s.12, 18, 19, 20,22 & 23 of the
Protection of Women under Domestic Violence Act,
2005 filed before the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate,
12th Court at Bandra, Mumbai against the Petitioner
and may kindly quash and set aside issuance of
Notice/Summons/Process dated 21.03.2022 by the
Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate against the Petitioner.”
[MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.]
Rajeshri Aher
::: Uploaded on – 16/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 19/07/2025 09:23:08 :::
[ad_2]
Source link