High Court · 2025

CRP No.1980 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated :29.07.2025 CORAM:THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BALAJIC.R.P.No.1980 of 2025and CMP Nos.11386 and 11387 of 2025Mrs.U.Geetha ... Petitioner vs 1.Mrs.M.Keerthana2.U.Rahul3.V.Udhayakumar .. Respondents Revision filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records in DVC No.24 of 2025 on the file of Hon'ble Additional Mahila Court, Egmore and quash the same.For Petitioner: Mrs.K.SumathiFor Respondents: No appearanceORDERHeard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Despite a fair and reasonable opportunity being given to the respondents, there is no appearance even today despite the revision being posted today under the caption “for orders”. In fact, earlier, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and reserved orders 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No.1980 of 2025and subsequently, in view of a mention having been made by the learned counsel for the respondents and in order to give an opportunity to the respondents to advance their arguments, the matter was listed today under the caption “for orders”. However, the said opportunity has not been availed of by the respondents. I have proceeded to hear the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would invite my attention to the complaints made against the revision petitioner, who is the mother-in-law of the first respondent, who has filed a compliant under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, (Act 43 of 2005). Taking me through the specific allegations that have been made against the revision petitioner/mother-in-law, the learned counsel for the petitioner would invite my attention to paragraph No.14, which is extracted hereunder for easy reference:-“ I further submit the Manipulative Behavior of Mother-in-Law and Escalation of Tensions to my face, she acted as though she genuinely cared for me, and I initially believed her. However, when the Respondent scolded me for not doing any work, I realized she had been manipulating the situation all along. During discussions between both parties, she made statements like, “They should have found a girl from a village or town who would not be so progressive and would remain silent.” It became clear that she was hinting at her dissatisfaction with me as a daughter-in-law. My mother-in-2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No.1980 of 2025law has repeatedly invaded my privacy by entering my room in my absence, snooping through my belongings, and then complaining to my husband about how I organize my things. This behavior is not only disrespectful but also invasion of my privacy.”3. Reading of the entire complaint indicates that other than paragraph No.14, there appears to be no other allegation levelled as against the revision petitioner herein. Even the allegations that are made in Paragraph no.14, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, would not qualify or amount to “domestic violence” as defined under Section 3 of the Domestic Violence Act. Section 3 of Domestic Violence Act is extracted hereunder: 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 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No.1980 of 2025clause (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; (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 her stridhan or any other property jointly or 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No.1980 of 2025separately 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. Explanation II.—For the purpose of determining whether any act, omission, commission or conduct of the respondent constitutes “domestic violence” under this section, the overall facts and circumstances of the case shall be taken into consideration.”4. The first respondent/daughter-in-law is entitled to lodge a complaint in the event of there being any physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse. The allegations made in Paragraph No.14 that the revision petitioner/mother-in-law is dissatisfied with the ways of the first respondent/daughter-in-law will certainly not fall within any of the limbs of Section 3, warranting a Domestic Violence complaint to be taken on file as against the revision petitioner.5. No doubt, the allegations that are made in the revision petition are also directed against the husband against whom the proceedings will have to naturally go for trial and it is for the parties to establish their respective cases.6. However, as far as the present revision petitioner/mother-in-law is 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No.1980 of 2025concerned, I do not see that the allegations that have been made in paragraph No.14 would be sufficient to qualify the respondent to lodge a complaint of Domestic Violence. 7. Even insofar as the allegations regarding return of jewels, it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even prior to filing of the compliant under Domestic Violence Act , a police complaint has been lodged before All Women Police Station, A-2, Adyar Police Station and the first respondent's father has withdrawn the complaint stating that all the jewels have been returned. It is also seen from the complaint that it is not the case of the respondents that there are still items of jewels that are to be returned by the revision petitioner.8. In view of the above, taking cognizance of the complaint as against the revision petitioner is unsustainable and the learned Magistrate has not applied his mind while taking cognizance of the complaint under the Domestic Violence Act and the same is clearly without jurisdiction and therefore, liable to be interfered under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.9. In the result, the Civil revision petition is allowed and insofar as the 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No.1980 of 2025revision petitioner/mother-in-law is concerned, the complaint given against the revision petitioner alone under Domestic Violence Act, is struck off. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 29.07.2025Index: Yes/NoWebsite:yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-speaking OrdersrToThe Additional Mahila Court, Egmore7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No.1980 of 2025P.B.BALAJI.,J.sr CRP No.1980 of 202529.07.20258/8