CRP No. 2185 of 2022 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH Civil Revision Petition No.2185 of 2022 1. A.Niyas S/o.Abdul Jafar 2. Haseena Abdul Jafar W/o.Abdul Jafar 3. Farha Afferian Abdul Jafar D/o.Abdul Jafar ..Petitioners Vs Sameena Kowser W/o.Niyas. A ..Respondent Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to call for the records pertaining to D.V.C.No.8 of 2022 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Krishnagiri and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and abuse of process. For Petitioners : Ms.A.Rajeswari ***** ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings in D.V.C.No.8 of 2022 on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Krishnagiri and to strike off the proceedings. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2185 of 2022 __________ Page2 of 4 2. The respondent initiated proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act against the petitioners, who are the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law and had sought for various reliefs. 3. The present revision has been filed on the ground that a false complaint has been given and all the family members have been roped in as parties and therefore, initiation of domestic violence proceedings is an abuse of process of law, which requires the interference of this Court. 4. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and carefully perused the materials available on record. 5. Insofar as the defence raised by the first petitioner is concerned, it has to be raised only before the Court below since the first petitioner is the husband. 6. Insofar as the petitioners 2 & 3 are concerned, they have taken a stand that they have nothing to do with the dispute between the first petitioner and respondent and they have been roped in only with a view to harass them without there being any cause of action against them. 7. The issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered by the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Arul Daniel and others v. Suganya https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2185 of 2022 __________ Page3 of 4 and others [2022 (6) CTC 833]. The grievance expressed by the petitioners 2 and 3 can be worked out in line with the guidelines issued in paragraph No.76(ix) of the aforesaid judgment and for proper appreciation, the same is extracted hereunder: “76 (ix) In Kunapareddy (cited supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld the Order of a Magistrate purportedly exercising powers under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “C.P.C.”), to permit the amendment of an Application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act. Taking a cue therefrom, it would be open to any of the Respondent(s), at any stage of the proceeding, to apply to the Magistrate to have their names deleted from the array of Respondents if they have been improperly joined as parties. For this purpose, the Magistrate can draw sustenance from the power under Order 1, Rule 10(2) of the C.P.C. A judicious use of this power would ensure that the proceedings under the D.V.Act do not generate into a weapon of harassment and would prevent the process of Court from being abused by joining all and sundry as parties to the lis.” 8. The Full Bench made it very clear that an order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by striking down the proceedings will be passed only in cases where the Magistrate suffers from patent lack of jurisdiction. That is not the case here and the grievance expressed by the petitioners 2 and 3 can be dealt with by them before whom the Domestic Violence proceedings are pending. 9. In the light of the above discussion, it is left open to the petitioners 2 and 3 to move an appropriate application before the Additional Mahila Court, Krishnagiri, seeking to delete their names from the array of respondents and the same will be dealt with on its own merits and in accordance with law after https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2185 of 2022 __________ Page4 of 4 N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. gm affording opportunities to both parties. If such an application is filed, it is left open to the respondent to file a counter. The petitioners 2 and 3 shall be permitted to be represented through counsel and their presence is dispensed with. This Civil Revision Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 13-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No gm To The Additional Mahila Court, Krishnagiri. Civil Revision Petition No.2185 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis