Introduction: The case of Roshan Omprakash Nagarkar and others versus Reena Vaibhav Nagarkar is presented before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench. The applicants, who are parents-in-law and brother-in-law of the respondent, seek to quash the proceedings initiated under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act).
Background: The applicants, parents-in-law, and brother-in-law of the respondent, are implicated in proceedings under the D.V. Act initiated by the respondent, Reena Vaibhav Nagarkar. The complaint alleges domestic violence but does not contain specific allegations against the applicants.
Key Arguments: The applicants’ counsel highlights that the respondent’s husband, son of the applicants, was employed in a bank in Dhaulpur, Rajasthan. It is asserted that the respondent resided briefly with her in-laws for only eight days after marriage, primarily staying in Rajasthan. The absence of specific allegations against the applicants is emphasized as grounds for quashing the proceedings.
Court’s Observations: The court notes the absence of specific allegations against the applicants in the complaint filed under the D.V. Act. Considering the facts presented, the court decides to issue notice to the respondent and stays further proceedings before the Magistrate concerning the applicants until the next hearing date.
Court’s Decision: The court permits the correction of a typographical error in the petition and instructs the applicants to amend it accordingly. It issues notice to the respondent, returnable on 05.07.2022, and stays further proceedings before the Magistrate involving the applicants until then.
Conclusion: The judgment reflects the court’s adherence to procedural fairness and principles of natural justice. By allowing the correction of errors and issuing notice to the respondent, the court ensures all parties have an opportunity to present their case. Additionally, the decision to stay further proceedings acknowledges the need for a fair and impartial adjudication of the matter. This underscores the court’s commitment to upholding justice while maintaining procedural integrity in cases involving allegations of domestic violence.