Can Dv Case Be Quashed?

Yes, Dv Case Can Be Quashed If Following Conditions Are Met With Your Case.

According to the protection of women from domestic violence act here are some important sections with definition that can help for quashing the DV case.

Domestic Relationship  = Section 2(f) of PWDV ‘domestic relationship’ means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family.”

Shared Household =  Section 2 (s) “shared household” means a household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage has lived in a domestic relationship either singly or along with the respondent and includes such a household whether owned or tenanted either jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent, or owned or tenanted by either of them in respect of which either the aggrieved person or the respondent or both jointly or singly have any right, title, interest or equity and includes such a household which may belong to the joint family of which the respondent is a member, irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right, title or interest in the shared household;

The hereinbefore definition is enough for understanding the terms that can sharply met for quashing the domestic violence proceeding case.

That the Honble High Court of MP has clearly held in case titled as ‘Kuldeep Singh and others Vs Rekha’ that the complaint of domestic violence is not maintainable when wife and husband leaves the share households to establish their own household, the domestic relationship comes to an end in respect of parents and other members of the family and as a result complaint under DV Act cannot be maintained against them. Consequently proceedings based upon the complaint initiated in the matter pending before the Judicial Magistrate is not maintainable against the applicant No.2 to 8 and deserves to be quashed”.

Under the Domestic Violence Act the first per-condition is that the applicant must be an aggrieved person is a person defined in Section 2(a) of the Act. The domestic relationship must be there between the aggrieved person and respondents to invoke Domestic Violence Act.

Now I am going to divide the quashing of domestic violence proceedings in two part as given.

By way of settlement = if the dispute has been comes on the smooth and straight way of settlement that means the parties want to settle the matter or the wife ready to reside with the husband then wife can withdraw the domestic violence case against husband and withdraw all the allegations that were made by her(complainant) against the husband(accused) moreover husband can approached the higher court for quashing the domestic violence case on the ground of settlement

when the accused i.e. husband smartly show their intelligence by not getting in the trap of the litigations surprised by wife then they both sought out the possibility of residing together, in some case where the husband and wife don’t want to reside together due to some misunderstanding or by lost of the comfort level with the partner then they can settle the matter or the husband has to pay a permanent alimony/maintenance (not in all DV case) to wife for met her daily expenses  needs, for divorce or for withdraw the DV. 

I am placing one supporting judgment where the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and the domestic violence proceeding be quashed by the apex court in K.Vivek vs N.Nakshathra

Contested DV case = if the wife filed an false domestic violence case against husband or the wife has no proof i.e. evidence or she has no point to tell before the magistrate then the husband can immediately moved to apex court for quashing the proceedings of the domestic violence case.

The domestic violence case can be quashed by the apex court when the wife filed an vague allegations domestic violence case or the husband has all appropriate evidence to prove his quashing case by telling the apex court that all allegation is false and vague in nature by producing the supporting evidence.

Apex court clearly said in case titled as Kamlesh Devi vs Jaipal on 4 October, 2019 that the ingredients of domestic violence are wholly absent in this case. The petitioner and the respondents are not persons living together in a shared household. There is a vague allegation that the respondents are family members. There is not a whisper of the respondents with the petitioner. They appear to be neighbors. And the case was dismissed.

Further the case of domestic violence can be quashed when the wife conceal the facts from the trial court and the husband very surely knows about his wife that she is hiding the true facts before the Hon’ble court then the husband has the liberty at all to move to the apex court for quashing the same on the ground of concealment of the true facts or evidence.

That the ground of the jurisdiction can also quashed the domestic violence case, the definition is clearly given in the protection of women from domestic violence act under section 27.

Here is the definition of jurisdiction as PWDV act ;(1) The court of Judicial Magistrate of the first class or the Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, within the local limits of which- (a) the person aggrieved permanently or temporarily resides or carries on business or is employed; or (b) the respondent resides or carries on business or is employed; or (c) the cause of action has arisen, shall be the competent court to grant a protection order and other orders under this Act and to try offences under this Act. (2) Any order made under this Act shall be enforceable throughout India.    

The another way to quash the proceeding of the domestic violence case when the cause of action not mention in the application of the domestic violence or when no such cause of action arose in favor of accused or he has supporting evidence where he able to proof that no such cause of action arose in favor of him then he has the liberty to move to the apex court for quashing alongwith all the supporting evidentry proof.