CRP.No.5250 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 31.10.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR CRP.No.5250 of 2025 and CMP.No.26441 of 2025 1.S.Koteeswaran 2. K.Santha 3.K.Yamuna 4. K.Karthikeyan ... Petitioners Vs. A.V.Sujitha ...Respondent PRAYER :Civil Revision Petition filed Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying, to strike off the complaint in DVC NO.16/2025 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Attur by allowing this CRP. For Petitioners : Mr.N.Manoharan ORDER The Civil Revision Petition is filed seeking to strike off the complaint preferred by the respondent under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act. 2. The 1st and 2nd petitioners are the parent-in-laws of the respondent /complainant. The 3rd petitioner is the sister-in-law of the respondent. The 4th 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.5250 of 2025 petitioner is the husband of the 3rd petitioner. 3. The respondent herein preferred a domestic violence complaint against the petitioners and her husband namely Dinesh @ Damodharan in DVC.No.16 of 2025. After receipt of notice in the complaint, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking to strike off the complaint on the ground that they never lived along with the respondent and hence, there was no shared household. 4. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Arul Daniel and Others Versus Suganya reported in (2022) SCC Online Mad 5435 held that any person aggrieved by the process issued by the Magistrate can go before the very same Magistrate and raise preliminary objections with regard to the issues like existence of a shared household/ domestic relationship etc., If any order is passed, the aggrieved person can also take recourse to an appeal under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act. The relevant portion reads as follows:- 87(vii). As there is no issuance of process as contemplated under Section 204, Cr.P.C. in a proceeding under the D.V. Act, the principle laid down in Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal ((2004) 7 SCC 338) that a process, under 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.5250 of 2025 Section 204, Cr.P.C, once issued cannot be reviewed or recalled, will not apply to a proceeding under the D.V. Act. Consequently, it would be open to an aggrieved respondent (s) to approach the Magistrate and raise the issue of maintainability and other preliminary issues. Issues like the existence of a shared household/domestic relationship etc., which form the jurisdictional basis for entertaining an application under Section 12, can be determined as a preliminary issue, in appropriate cases. Any person aggrieved by such an order may also take recourse to an appeal under Section 29 of the D.V. Act for effective redress (See V.K. Vijayalekshmi Amma v. Bindu V., (2010) 87 AIC 367). This would stem the deluge of petitions challenging the maintainability of an application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act, at the threshold before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. 5. In view of the availability of alternative remedy before Magistrate, as held by Full Bench in Arul Daniel case, this Court is not inclined to exercise supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Virudhunagar Nadargal Dharma Paripalana Shabha Vs Tuticorin Educational Society reported in MANU/SC/1365/2019 held that availability of alternative remedy before regular Courts, is near total bar for exercise of supervisory power by High Court. Hence, I am not inclined 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.5250 of 2025 to interfere in revision. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Magistrate for getting appropriate remedy in terms of order passed in Arul Daniel case cited supra. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 7. Taking into consideration the petitioners 1 and 2 are senior citizens and petitioners 3 and 4 are only sister-in-law and brother-in-law, their personal appearance before Magistrate is dispensed with unless their appearance is absolutely necessary. 31.10.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No nr S.SOUNTHAR , J. nr To The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Attur 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP.No.5250 of 2025 CRP.No.5250 of 2025 and CMP.No.26441 of 2025 31.10.2025 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis