Very good judgment wherein, false DVC is dismissed on all family members, except husband, for the ground of general and sweeping allegation. More interestingly, same allegations were used to file a false IPC 498A case also earlier.
In the instant case, by making the very same general and sweeping allegations, the petitioner get the respondents 2 to 6 involved in the domestic violence case. From the nature of the allegations levelled against the respondents 2 to 6, the intention of the complainant seems to be that she wanted to involve all the relatives of her husband in the domestic violence case. By examining the facts of the present case, in the light of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in the above referred judgments, I am thoroughly convinced that the respondents 2 to 6 were involved in the DVC on account of the vindictive attitude of the petitioner/wife, continuing them in the DVC will not yield any useful purpose except causing harassment and hardship to them. Both the Courts below, therefore, are perfectly justified in taking the view that the cognizance of the case shall not been taken against the respondents 2 to 6/A2 to A6.
Buravilli Siva Madhuri Vs. Sri Buravilli Satya Venkata Lakshmana Rao and others on 25 September, 2012
Citation: [2013 ALD CRI 1 634], [2013 CRILJ 4653]
Indiankanoon.org or Casemine link: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5608f8bae4b0149711143245
The index page is here.
