THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2430 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in D.V.C. No.3 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Banaganapalle, Kurnool district. 2. The first respondent lodged a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 requiring protection under Section 18 of the Act, residence under Section 19 of the Act, monetary relief to an extent of Rs.3,000/- per month and compensation under Section 22 of the Act. The allegations leveled against the petitioners are that, she was married to R.1 in the D.V.C. on 12.2.2004 and at the marriage of marriage, a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- and 5 tolas of gold ornaments were given as dowry. After the marriage, they lived happily for some time. Thereafter, respondents 1 to 5 in the D.V.C. started quarrelling with her demanding additional dowry and necked out her from the house and she is living separately. Though she approached her husband after birth of child, there is no response from him. She also lodged a complaint for the offence punishable under Section 498A I.P.C. and M.C. No.2 of 2007 for maintenance. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are married sisters of R.1 in the D.V.C. and they are nothing to do with the domestic violence, and that no reliefs are sought for insofar as the present petitioners are concerned, and hence, continuation of the impugned proceedings against the petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of court. Hence, he prays to quash the impugned proceedings. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel representing the Public Prosecutor opposed the same on the ground that the allegations made out a prima facie case for the offence alleged against the petitioners, and therefore there are no grounds to quash the impugned proceedings. 5. There cannot be any dispute that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised when there is an abuse of process of Court or to secure ends of justice or to give effect to any order under the Code. When the allegations in the complaint do not make a prima facie case for the offence alleged, then only the question of quashing the same would arise. 6. Basing on the allegations in the complaint, the learned Magistrate passed an order dated 31.7.2007 prohibiting the respondents 1 to 5 in the D.V.C. from committing acts of domestic violence against the first respondent herein and her son and causing violence to the dependents and other relatives or who give her assistance from domestic violence, and restraining them from dispossessing the first respondent herein in any manner from shared household and further directed them to maintain the petitioner and her child. The said order has become final. When the order is violated by the respondents 1 to 5 in the D.V.C., the first respondent herein filed a petition to punish them, and the same is pending. Therefore, even though no reliefs are sought for against the petitioners herein, in the D.V.C., they were the persons along with other respondents, who allegedly committed domestic violence. Whether the petitioners herein are married sisters of A.1 or whether they are residing far away place along with their respective husbands or not, are the questions of facts, which cannot be decided and determined in this petition. Therefore, there are no grounds to quash the impugned proceedings against the petitioners. 7. The Criminal Petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. ---------------- 8.7.2010 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2430 OF 2008 Date: 8.7.2010 Between: Savithri & another …Petitioners And Sugali Venkata Lakshamma, w/o. Sugali Rama Raju Naik & another …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2430 of 2008 8.7.2010