Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137414 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21637 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijay Kumar And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Somendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. A supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Somendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Moti Lal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicants for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 59/IX/ of 2020 (Seema Vs. Vijay and Others), under Section-12, 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23 of Domestic Violence Act- 2005, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Mathura which pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.. 4. The case of the applicant is that a complaint stood lodged by the O.P. No.2 under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23 of Domestic Violence Act-2005 against the applicants, who are husband, mother-in-law, jeth, jethani, nanad and nandoi of O.P. No.2 with an allegation that the marriage of applicant no.1 stood solemnized with O.P. No.2 on 04.11.2023. Allegation is that O.P. No.2 belongs to a poor family and she post-marriage was taken to Mumbai, where the applicant herein is engaged in a business of distribution of Parle-G. It is alleged that O.P. No.2 was thrown out and was provided and accorded accommodation in Mathura to live. Allegation is that the applicants, who are the family members are not taking caring of the O.P. No.2 and further she has not been given any monetary benefit in that regard and subjected to domestic violence. 5. Sri Somendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the complaint as well as the order issuing notices cannot be sustained for a simple reason, particularly when the allegation is that the O.P. No.2 has been provided a residential accommodation. Submission is that the O.P. No.2 does not answer the description of an aggrieved person under Section 2(a), there is no domestic relationship as per Section 2(f), applicants do not answer the description of respondent under Section 2(q) and there is no shared household under Section 2(s). Contention is that once a separate accommodation has been provided and it is also the case of O.P. No.2 that she is living in a house which has been provided by the applicant, then there is no question of subjection of domestic violence. 6. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the complaint had been lodged in the year 2018 and there happens to be an order dated 16.03.2019 for proceeding exparte, thus in the absence of any order under Chapter IV of the Act, it is for the appliant to contest the proceedings and to take all the legal and factual submissions. 7. I have heard the submissions so made across the Bar and perused the records carefully. 8. Apparently, a complaint came to be lodged by O.P. No.2 against the applicants, who are husband and other family members under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act. Notices were issued and thereafter the proceedings were directed to be held exparte. Thus, at this stage, the Court is confronted with the challenge raised to the complaint under the Domestic Violence Act as well as the order issuing notices. Once the O.P. No.2 claims to be the wife of applicant no.1 and rest of the applicants are inlaws, then prima facie in view of the allegations so made in the complaint O.P. No.2 is an aggrieved persons who alleges subjection to domestic violence. The words 'domestic violence' have been defined under Section 2(f), which means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in shared household. Thus, the nature of the allegations prima facie do not indicate that they are frivolous rather triable in view of the fact that the allegation is with respect to subjection to domestic violence. With respect to the shared household is concerned, the same is defined under Section 2(s), which deals with shared household, which means a household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage has lived in a domestic relationship either singly or along with the respondent, and the respondents have been defined under Section 2(q). 9. Looking into the over all facts and situation and also bearing in mind the relationship of the parties and the nature of the allegations, this Court is of the opinion that the case cannot be said to be a non-existent case, which should not be proceeded with. Moreover, no orders have been passed under Chapter IV of the Act and it is for the applicants to appear and contest the proceedings and in case any orders are passed then they are amenable to challenge by way of appeal under Section 29 of the Act or by preferring an appropriate proceedings under Section 25 of the Act. 10. Accordingly, interference is declined. The application is disposed of making it open for the applicant to contest the proceedings while taking all legal and factual grounds before the court below and this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the court below shall consider the same in correct perspective and in case, orders are passed, then it is for the applicant to take legal remedies as available under law. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad