"Anger against husband spilled over to children:" Bombay High Court quashes Domestic Violence case filed by mother against daughter

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday quashed criminal proceedings under provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act initiated by a mother against the daughter (Vanisha v. XYZ & State of Maharashtra). .A Bench of Justices SS Shinde and Manish Pitale observed that the allegations against the petitioner-daughter were improbable and were made by the mother only because the petitioner chose to stay with her father."The Petitioner is a young lady, who has just graduated and her future depends upon how she is able to improve her educational qualifications and develop her personality. It is surprising that her own mother is hell-bent upon creating obstructions in her progress,” the Court observed. .The Court further said that the allegations by the mother against the daughter are exaggerated and borne out of matrimonial discord, bitterness and anger towards her husband. .The mother had filed a complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate at Andheri, Mumbai under provisions of DV Act against her husband and their daughter. There was only one allegation made against the daughter - a single incident of assault which included pouring of hot water on her feet. .The daughter moved the High Court for quashing said proceedings claiming she had been unnecessarily dragged into matrimonial discord between her parents and it was having a detrimental effect on her career and her prospects of studying abroad..Advocate Kenny Thakkar for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was was unnecessarily made a party to the proceedings because she continued to reside with her father..The urgency for filing the proceedings was that the petitioner had completed her engineering course and wanted to undertake further studies in Australia which was to commence from May 2021 for which a declaration was required regarding pendency of criminal proceedings against the petitioner..It was further submitted that the reliefs sought in the application were all maintainable only against the husband and, therefore, the proceedings against her deserve to be quashed..The mother, through her advocate M Moses opposed the plea stating that the petitioner was covered under the definition of ‘Respondent’ under the DV Act. It was claimed that the petitioner was not required to go abroad for studies and that this was only an excuse given by her to escape the proceedings pending before the Magistrate..The mother also chose to make certain statements about the character of her daughter. "There are certain statements made about the character of the Petitioner and that she allegedly has many boyfriends. On this basis, the Respondent sought dismissal of the writ petition," the Court noted .The Court agreed with the petitioner observing that the daughter has been caught in the "crossfire of acrimony and matrimonial discord" between her parents.The Court said that pendency of the case would be a hurdle for the petitioner-daughter to obtain a Visa. .“Pendency of the said proceeding initiated under the DV Act by her mother are creating hurdles for the petitioner to successfully seek Visa in order to visit Australia for undertaking higher studies,” the order stated..The Bench further observed from the evidence placed before it that “the single allegation made against the petitioner is an exaggeration and it has arisen out of anger of respondent (mother) against the petitioner, as she continued to reside with her father, i.e. the husband of respondent. Respondent has developed bitterness and anger, not only against her husband but her daughter i.e. the petitioner also.”.A perusal of the application before the Magistrate showed that the entire grievance is raised against her own husband but it is only at one place that an allegation is made against the petitioner, the Court said..The bitterness against her husband spilled over to her children, the Court said while also noting that though the younger daughter of the respondent had initially accompanied her, she was later disallowed to keep the younger daughter also with her. "It appears that due to these circumstances, Respondent No.1 has developed bitterness and anger, not only against her husband but her daughter i.e. the Petitioner also," the order said. .The Court concluded that the allegation levelled by the mother against the daughter are exaggerated and her anger and bitterness arising from matrimonial discord with her husband, is leading to serious impediment in the progress of her own daughter, the petitioner..The allegations are ‘absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person could reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, the Court concluded.It, therefore, quashed the proceedings initiated by the mother against the daughter. .[Read Judgment]