Order 2

Order Details: Order
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (FIRST CLASS)
10TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI
C.C.No. 336/DV/2018
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION EXH. 25
The respondent No.3 has sought the relief of dropping of
proceedings against her.
2. The application is replied at Exh.31 and rejoinder is filed at
Exh.36. The respondent No.3 along-with respondent No.2 and 4 has filed
several photographs on record. The respondent No.3 has filed written
submissions at Exh.57 in support of her petition and written submissions of
petitioner at Exh.61.
3. It is contended by respondent No.3 that she has very good
bonding with petitioner while she was at matrimonial home and she took
extra efforts to ensure her comfort. It is also stated by her that though she
made allegations of torture mentioning incident dated 10/08/2018 and
claiming to leave the house on that day but, petitioner had accompanied her
on the very next day to her friend’s home for lunch party. The printouts of
screenshots taken from the facebook post. This shows that this petition shows
nothing but an effort to maline and defame her family. She has also tendered
on record the screenshots of whatsapp chats between them. She has further
claimed that only allegation against her is mentioned in point No. 4(e) of the
petition which reads as under :
“…. Respondents 3 and 4 who were witnessing al the
abuse duly ensured that the Applicant does not get
any opportunity to even meet her parents personally
and instead they ensured that the Applicant is made to
-- 1 of 5 --
2
bear all the mental and physical torture meted out to
her by them jointly and severally”.
4. Thus, she claimed that there is no clear and convincing allegation
against her to show that she did any domestic violence to the petitioner and
therefore, proceeding shall be dropped against her.
5. The petitioner through her reply pointed point No.4 (e) of her
petition and also relied upon the printout of chats between her and
respondent No.1 as well as respondent No.4 which shows that respondent
No.1 subjected at to domestic violence and that respondent No.4 was aware
of the domestic abuse done to the applicant and that respondent No.1 was
drug addict. According to her, respondent No.3 ought to have helped her but,
she watched the abuse done to her.
6. By virtue of rejoinder filed by respondent No.3, it is mentioned
that no allegations have been put against respondent No.3 and no role has
been attributed to her in alleged seen of domestic violence and nor did she
witnessed any violence done to her. It is mentioned that the allegation of
being cheated into marrying a drug addict does not anyway attract any
liability towards her as the marriage between petitioner and respondent No.1
was love marriage. She also claimed that the petitioner made a informed
choice of marrying respondent No.1 and concocted stories of his drug
addiction solely to play a victim card and extract wealth from their family.
She further states that the petitioner was friend to her and she betrayed her
by making false allegations. She has also mentioned that the petitioner is P. hd
scholar and knowingly married the respondent No.1 knowing that he was
nave and good be easy trap to ploy for money.She referred to whatsapp chat
dated 10/08/2018 where the petitioner said “
Ma please keep the rings … I
-- 2 of 5 --
3
think they are on my dressing table on the 18th Floor….. I left them there in
anger….. but just thought you should keep it safe with you”. She has also
stated that the petitioner is conveniently changing the narrative for her own
good to pressurize the respondent No.1. She is in possession of all her
ornaments and stridhan amount and acknowledgment in form of photograph
and signature of complainant are with respondent No.3 which printouts are
tendered by her on record along-with certificate u/Sec. 65-B of Indian
Evidence Act.
7. Heard both sides and perused the written submissions of both
sides. The Ld. Advocate for the petitioner in her reply has referred to the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘
Prabha Tyagi V/s. Kamlesh Devi’.
Following points for determination arose from my consideration. I have
recorded to my findings to them for the reasons mentioned therein.
Sr.
No
Points for the Determination Findings
1 Whether applicant is entitled for dropping
of proceedings against her ?
….In the Affirmative
2 What order ? …. Allowed
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO. 1
8. The relationship between the parties is not at dispute. I have
gone through the petition as well as chats referred by the parties.
9. Indeed following material in point No. 4(e) of the petition is the
-- 3 of 5 --
4
only allegation made by the petitioner against respondent No.4. It reads
“….
Respondents 3 and 4 who were witnessing al the abuse duly ensured that the
Applicant does not get any opportunity to even meet her parents personally and
instead they ensured that the Applicant is made to bear all the mental and physical
torture meted out to her by them jointly and severally”. However, in the reply in
Exh.31 the petitioner has mentioned that even after hurtful actions of
respondent No.2, she wanted to maintain good relations with in-laws and
wanted this marriage to work and therefore, she attended party with
respondent No.3. Her contention in reply against the respondent No.3 was
only pertaining to some items of stridhan which are still in possession of the
respondent No.3 as alleged by petitioner. However, it is clear that neither
from the contentions in the domestic violence petition nor from the
screenshots of whatsapp chats with respondent No.1 or respondent No.3 or
respondent No.4, it could be said that the petitioner was subjected to
domestic abuse by the respondent No.3. All the allegations made against
respondent No.3 seems to be ambiguous. Even the judgment of
Prabha Tyagi
V/s. Kamlesh Devi’ does not comes to petitioner’s rescue for that reason that
the facts in the said matter are totally different from the facts of the case in
hand.
10. Prima facie neither petition nor the chats disclose any substance
amounting to domestic abuse at the hands of respondent No.3 as defined in
Section 3 of the PWDV Act, 2005. The allegation that the respondent No.3
witnessed domestic abuse done to the applicant is not sufficient to prima facie
hold that the respondent No.3 has caused any sort of domestic abuse to the
petitioner. Even the facts stated in the petition together with the printouts of
whatsapp chats does not make out prima facie case of emotional abuse on the
part of respondent No.3. Thus, for these reasons, I am convinced that there is
no prima facie case of domestic violence made out against respondent No.3.
-- 4 of 5 --
5
Thus, following order :
ORDER
1. Application is allowed.
2. The proceedings in C.C.No. 336/DV/2018 against respondent No.3
Shikha Vinod Sachdev are hereby dropped.
Sd/-
(S.G. Agrawal)
Place : Mumbai. Judicial Magistrate (F.C.)
Dated : 31/07/2026 10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 5 of 5 --