No illtreatment to wife ,only demand of some articles, whether Domestic violence is made out?

 The only allegation against the applicant nos.2, 3 and 4 is 
that a demand was made by them and pursuant to the demand, the 

paragraph no.2 of the complaint.   
parents   of   the   non­applicant   have   given   the   items   as   stated   in 
Shri   Vyas,   learned   Advocate   for   the   non­applicant,   has 
submitted   that   the   allegations   made   in   paragraph   no.3   against   the 
applicants   constitute   domestic   violence   as   contemplated   by   Section 

3(b) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 
However,   we   find   that   the   non­applicant   has   not   even   pleaded   that 
there   was   harassment   or   harm   or   injuries   or   anything   which 
endangered   her   to   coerce   her   to   fulfill   the   demand,   which   are   the 
necessary ingredients.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 527 of 2013.
  Vikrant Sudhakar Ambhore,

                          : VERSUS :

Varsha Vikrant Ambhore,
                    
                                 
             
  CORAM:      A.B.CHAUDHARI AND 
                     Z. A. HAQ, JJ.
   DATED:     19th NOVEMBER, 2013.
Citation; 2014 ALLMR(CRI)2826 Bom



Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Rule.  Rule is made returnable forthwith.
3. The   applicants   have   invoked   the   jurisdiction   of   this   Court 

1. 
under   Section   482   of   the   Code   of   Criminal   Procedure   praying   for 
quashing   of   the   complaint   filed   by   the   non­applicant   under   the 
provisions   of  the  Protection   of  Women  from  Domestic   Violence  Act, 
2005.
4.
With   the   assistance   of   the   learned   Advocates   for   the 
applicants and non­applicant, we have gone through the complaint filed 
by the non­applicant before the Magistrate.   There are no averements 
in the complaint which make out any offence against the applicant nos. 
2, 3 and 4.   The only allegation against the applicant nos.2, 3 and 4 is 
that a demand was made by them and pursuant to the demand, the 

paragraph no.2 of the complaint.   
5.
parents   of   the   non­applicant   have   given   the   items   as   stated   in 
Shri   Vyas,   learned   Advocate   for   the   non­applicant,   has 
submitted   that   the   allegations   made   in   paragraph   no.3   against   the 
applicants   constitute   domestic   violence   as   contemplated   by   Section 

3(b) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 
However,   we   find   that   the   non­applicant   has   not   even   pleaded   that 
there   was   harassment   or   harm   or   injuries   or   anything   which 
endangered   her   to   coerce   her   to   fulfill   the   demand,   which   are   the 
necessary ingredients.
6.
Shri Vyas, the learned Advocate for the non­applicant has 
further submitted that in paragraph no.3 of the complaint it is stated 
that   the   applicant   nos.2,   3   and   4   had   been   co­operating   with   the 
applicant   no.1   for   harassing   the   non­applicant.     We   find   that   the 
allegations made against applicant nos.2, 3 and 4 are vague and do 

not constitute domestic violence as contemplated by the provisions of 
the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.  The averements prima facie, even if 
taken at its face value, do not constitute the offence.
In view of the above, we find that the continuation of the 
7.

complaint as filed by the non­applicant against applicant nos.2, 3 and 4 
is abuse of the process of law and therefore, the complaint as filed 
against the applicant nos.2, 3 and 4 has to be quashed.   As far as the 
complaint against applicant no.1 is concerned, we find that there are 
prima facie allegations and material in the complaint.   Hence, it cannot 
be   quashed   in   exercise   of   the   jurisdiction   under   Section   482   of   the 
Code of Criminal Procedure.  
8.
In view of the above, the application is partly allowed.  The 
complaint filed against the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 4 under Section 12 
of   the   Protection   of   Women   from   Domestic   Violence   Act,   2005   is 

quashed.      The complaint as  against the  applicant no.1  to continue 
before the learned Magistrate.    In the circumstances, parties to bear 
their own costs.
   

Print Page