114 , 2020 (3 )Crimes466 (SC ), 2020 (1 )CriminalCC548 , I (2020 )DMC395 SC , 2020 (1 )HLR414 (SC ), 2020 INSC 77 , 2020 (1 )JKJ448 [SC ], 2020 (3 )KCCR1654 , 2020 (1 ) KHC 876 , 2020 (1 )KLJ799 , 2020 (1 )KLT666 , 2020 -3 -LW413 , 2020 -1 -LW(Crl)799 , 2020 (1 )RCR(Criminal)810 , 2020 (3 )RLW1803 (SC ), 2020 (2 )SCALE313 , (2020 )3 SCC14 , [2020 ]1 SCR125 , 2020 (1 )UC457 , ,MANU/SC/0067/2020
R. Banumathi#A.S. Bopanna#Hrishikesh Roy#332SC4520Judgment/OrderAIC#AIR#AKR#ALD(Cri)#Allahabad Criminal Cases#BLJ#CivilCC#CriLJ#Crimes#CriminalCC#DMC#HLR#INSC#JKJ#KCCR#KHC#KLJ#KLT#LW#LW(Criminal)#MANU#RCR (Criminal)#RLW#SCALE#SCC#SCR#UCR. Banumathi,SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2020-1-2375769,75770,75771,20286,75778,17483 -->
MANU/SC/0067/2020
True Court CopyTM EnglishTrue Court CopyTM Kannada
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4979 of 2019)
Decided On: 22.01.2020
Appellants: Shyamlal Devda and Ors. Vs. Respondent: Parimala ..(+)
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
R. Banumathi, A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy JUDGMENT
R. Banumathi, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 18.02.2019 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Criminal Petition No. 5959 of 2015 in and by which the High Court has dismissed the petition filed by the Appellants stating that the Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru has the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint filed by the Respondent Under Sections 18, 19 and 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (For short "Domestic Violence Act").
3. Brief facts which led to filing of this appeal are as follows:
The marriage of Respondent-wife and Appellant No. 14-Manoj Kumar was solemnized on 01.05.2006, as per Hindu rites and customs in Rajasthan. After marriage, the Respondent was residing with Appellant No. 14 in her matrimonial house at Chennai along with Appellants No. 1 and 2 who are the parents of the Appellant No. 14. In April, 2014, Appellant No. 14 and Respondent-wife went to Bengaluru from Chennai to attend Respondent's sister wedding. After the said wedding, the Respondent expressed her desire to remain at Bengaluru for some time; which was acceded to by Appellant No. 14 with the understanding that the Respondent would stay in her parent's house for short time. According to the Appellants, the Respondent thereafter refused to join her matrimonial home or cohabit with Appellant No. 14. Appellant No. 14 filed O.P. No. 11355 of 2015 Under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court, Chennai. Thereafte........