Proceedings Under Section 12 Domestic Violence Act Not Bar To Initiating Criminal Action, Lodging FIR U/S 498A IPC: JKL High Court

The observations were made by a bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar while hearing a plea filed by petitioner-husband challenging the FIR registered against him under Sections 498A and 109 of IPC on the basis of a complaint filed by his wife-complainant.

Single-judge Justice Sanjay Dhar said that the scope of proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act and the scope of criminal proceedings initiated pursuant to lodging of FIR for cruelty under IPC are entirely different.

"While in proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act, the victim of domestic violence can be awarded monetary compensation and she can also be given certain protective orders in her favour, but the criminal proceedings are intended to punish the perpetrator of a crime, may be a matrimonial crime. So, the provisions of DV Act and IPC act in different fields," the Court said.

The petitioner had premised the challenge on the ground that the allegations made in the FIR were absolutely vexatious and with a view to victimise and harass the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner also contended that since the wife had already filed an application under Section 12 of DV Act, she cannot be allowed to lodge an FIR against the petitioner-husband and his relatives for Section 498A offence.

The petitioner argued that all his relatives including his parents and brother-in-law have been roped in the FIR which shows that the wife (respondent No. 3) only intends to harass the petitioner.

Adjudicating upon the matter Justice Dhar observed that merely because the wife has filed an application under DV Act, she cannot be debarred from lodging FIR against the petitioner for investigating the acts of cruelty alleged to have been perpetrated by her husband against her.

Deliberating on the contention of the petitioner that there are no specific allegations against him in the impugned FIR, the court said that the allegations made in the impugned FIR are very specific in nature as regards the role of petitioner. It has been specifically stated in the FIR that the petitioner made demands of cash and car from respondent No. 3 and it has also been specifically stated that the petitioner used to physically and mentally torture her in connection with demands of dowry, hence the above Conte is without merit, the court added.

Commenting on the unnecessary roping in of relatives of the petitioner in the impugned FIR, the court said that this ground may be available to the relatives of the petitioner and not to the petitioner i.e. husband of respondent No. 3.

Accordingly the bench dismissed the petition, finding it without any merit.

Case Title: Danish Chauhan Vs DGP J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 36

Click Here To Read/Download Order