Dr. G. Yethirajulu, J.
Mohammad Maqeenuddin Ahemad
State of Andhra Pradesh &
Crl. Petition No. 5900 of 2006
Decided on 10.4.2007
Protection of Women From
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Section 12 and 20- Cognizance of
offence on complaint – Petition to quash proceedings – Allegations
of neglect, cruelty and demands against petitioner – respondent
husband of daughter of complainant and petitioners 2 to 10 were alleged
to have abetted offence – Prayer portion of complaint revealed
that reliefs were sought against 1st respondent only- No specific allegations
were made against petitioners 2 to 11 and no specific relief was claimed
against them – Proceedings against petitioners 2 to 11 were liable
to be quashed.
Held: Under Section 22 of
the Act also compensation can be awarded. From the prayer portion of
the petitioner, it is revealed that the reliefs were sought against
the first respondent/ first petitioner herein only. From the body of
the petition also, no specific allegations were made against the respondents
2 to 11 / petitioners 2 to 11 herein except mentioning that at their
instance, the first petitioner was demanding money and that he was not
providing money for medical expenses disowned the liability being abetted
by petitioners 2 to 10. Since no relief is claimed against petitioners
2 to 11, it is unnecessary to continue the proceedings against them
amounts to abuse of process of law. Therefore, I am inclined to quash
the proceedings against the petitioner 2 to 11.
So far as the first petitioner
is concerned, the entire claim is against him. Since there are allegations
in the petition that he neglected to pay medical expenses and also neglected
to maintain her and her children, I am not inclined to quash the proceedings
against him. (Paras 7 & 8)
Result: Petition allowed.
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner: Ch. Janardhan Reddy,
For the Respondent No. 1: P.P.
For the Respondent No. 2: C. Narender, Advocate