Domestic violence related proceedings initiated by mother against father, based on exaggerated allegations, wherein she has unnecessarily dragged her daughter in the proceeding, quashed
Daughter seeking quashing of proceedings initiated by her mother under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. A perusal of the application filed by the mother shows that the entire grievance is raised against her own husband i.e. father of the Petitioner. It is only at one place in the application that an allegation is made against Petitioner that on the husband /father of the Petitioner instigating the Petitioner, she allegedly assaulted the mother. This allegation is repeated in similar words in the affidavit of evidence filed before the Magistrate by the mother.
Except for the aforesaid allegation, all allegations in the application as well as an affidavit in evidence filed by the mother before the Magistrate raise grievances only against the husband. It appears from the tenor of the said application and affidavit in evidence that the relationship between mother and her husband is extremely bitter.
The mother has specifically sought a protection order from the Magistrate, further seeking monetary relief to the tune of Rs.80,000/- per month, a residence order, to provide either rental accommodation or to purchase property for her, apart from seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.85.00 Lacs. All these reliefs are clearly relatable to the husband, particularly when allegations have been made and grievances have been raised by her against her husband.
Material on record showing that Petitioner continued to live with her father i.e. husband of complainant mother and this was the reason complainant added petitioner as a party to proceedings under DV Act.
No reliefs sought by the complainant in said proceedings against the petitioner. Allegations levelled by mother against daughter are exaggerated and her anger and bitterness arising from matrimonial discord with her husband are leading to serious impediment in the progress of her own daughter. Petitioner, daughter completed her graduation in engineering, looking forward to joining higher studies abroad. Pendency of proceedings under the DV Act is creating hurdles for her to obtain a Visa for Australia, so as to join a course of higher studies. Since the petitioner unnecessarily dragged into the said case, proceeding against her, quashed.
Appearing Counsel/s : Ms. Kenny V. Thakkar, Mr. M. Moses, Mr. Deepak Thakre, Mr. J.P. Yagnik,
