DHEERAJ ARORA vs PARINEY KHANNA

Judgment text excerpt

$~61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 08th May, 2025 + CRL.M.C. 2318/2021,CRL.M.A. 15407/2021, CRL.M.A. 16056/2021 DHEERAJ ARORA .....Petitioner Through: Petitioner through VC Versus PARINEY KHANNA .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner seeking quashing of Complaint Case No. 16857/2018 filed by the Respondent under Sections 1(2)/2(s)/5/8(1)/9(1) (b)/12 (1)/12(3), 13(1) and 27 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (henceforth referred to as ‘DV Act’) and Rule 2(b)/4(1)/5(1)/5(1) Form No. IV of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules. 2. Briefly stated, on the Complaint filed by the Respondent, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide Order dated 15.10.2018 directed the Protection Officer of New Delhi to file DIR and summons were issued to Petitioner. 3. It is submitted that the summons were issued by overlooking Section 1(2) of DV Act which states that the Act does not extend to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The Protection Officer, New Delhi, without Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2318/2021 Page 1 of 9 Signed By:VIKAS ARORA Signing Date:13.05.2025 17:06:40 conducting any inquiry at the place of occurrence of the alleged domestic violence, submitted the DIR on 30.11.2018 against the Petitioner as well as against Respondents No.2 & 3 who are residents of Amritsar, Punjab. 4. The Petitioner filed an Application dated 15.01.20021 seeking discharge of himself as well as of Respondents No.2 & 3. He annexed the documents to show that the Complainant had worked as Deputy Manager, SBI, Kharar Branch and had lived in a separate household allotted by the Bank during the period from 11