Delhi District Court
Vikas Malu vs Saanvi Malu on 18 March, 2026
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
IN THE COURT OF MS. MANU GOEL KHARB:
SPECIAL JUDGE, NDPS-02: SOUTH WEST,
DWARKA COURTS : NEW DELHI
CA no. 739/2025
CNR No.DLSW01-010906-2025
Vikas Malu
S/o Late Mul Chand Malu
R/o P-43, Dubai Hills View
Estate, Dubai Hills, Dubai UAE
.....Appellant
Versus
Saanvi Malu
R/o Flat No. 212D, BC Block East,
Near Kela Godown, Shalimar Bagh,
Delhi
.....Respondent
AND
CA no. 740/2025
CNR No.DLSW01-010907-2025
1.Harshita Malu
D/o Sh. Vikas Malu
2.Sakshi Malu
D/o Sh. Vikas Malu
3.Vineet Malu
S/o Sh. Vikas Malu
All R/o A-15, Pushpanjali Farm,
Kapashera, New Delhi
.....Appellants
Versus
Saanvi Malu
R/o Flat No. 212D, BC Block East,
Near Kela Godown, Shalimar Bagh,
Delhi.
Digitally
signed by
.....Respondent
MANU MANU
KHARB
GOEL
GOEL Date:
KHARB 2026.03.18
17:39:57 -
0100 Page 1 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
Date of Institution of the Appeal : 06.11.2025
Date of Arguments : 06.03.2026
Date of Judgment : 18.03.2026
Appeal Argued by:
Sh. Tanvir Ahmed Mir, Senior Advocate assisted by
Sh. Saudh Khan, Ld. Counsel for appellant.
Sh. Surjendu Sankar Das and Ms. Anie Mittal, Ld.
Counsel for respondent.
JUDGMENT
1. Vide this common judgment, I shall dispose of two appeals filed under Section 29 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, bearing CA No.739/25 & 740/25 respectively, arising out of the common impugned order dated 06.10.2025 passed by the Ld. JMFC (Mahila Court)-06, South West District, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in case bearing No. MC 1029/2023 titled as Saanvi Malu Vs Vikas Malu & Ors., vide which Ld. Trial Court dismissed the application seeking dismissal of the petition u/s 12 of PWDV Act.
2. Appellant in CA no. 739/2025 was the respondent no. 1 and appellants in CA no. 740/2025 were the respondents no.2 to 4 before the Ld. Trial Court and the respondent Saanvi Malu was the complainant before the Ld. Trial Court. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be addressed by the same nomenclature by which they were addressed before the Ld. Trial Court.
Digitally signed by MANU Page 2 of 19 MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:40:08 -0100
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
3 Common brief facts as per the case of complainant
filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ( hereinafter referred as "DV Act"), are that the respondent no.1 divorced her previous wife Sarika in 2015 and has three children from the first marriage i.e. respondent no. 2, 3 and 4. In the year 2008-2009, the complainant was working as an event supervisor with M/s Creative and Event Management firm of one Mr. Dinesh Tuli who used to organize events for Mr. Vikas Malu and so complainant looked after Vikas Malu company's event affairs as an Event Supervisor. It is stated that compelling circumstances in February 2019 culminated into marriage of complainant with respondent no.1 and they got married before the Marriage Registrar, Jhandewalan, Delhi on 13.03.2019 and their marriage came to be registered on 22.04.2019. After marriage, the complainant started living at her matrimonial home i.e. A-15, Pushpanjali Farm, Bijwasan, Kapashera, Delhi. The complainant stated that she has been suffering physical and mental abuse, pain, helplessness, unhappiness and anger because of the respondents. Soon after the marriage, the complainant came to know that the respondent no.1 was very aggressive, angry, abusive and a sexual beast and wanted to control the complainant in every aspect. Complainant has Digitally signed by MANU levelled accusations of non-consensual sexual relations by her MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:40:27 -
husband, unwanted sexual advances by her step son, sexual 0100 Page 3 of 19 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu harassment by her step daughters and physical and mental harassment. These allegations were the basis of her complaint, leading to legal proceedings. Vide order dated 21.02.2023, respondents 1 to 4 were summoned by the Ld. Trial Court.
4. Respondents put in appearance before the Ld. Trial Court through their counsel and thereafter, filed an application before the Ld. Trial Court for dismissal of the DV petition on the ground that earlier FIR no. 525/2022 dated 15.11.2022 was registered by the complainant against them on the same set of allegations at PS Kapasehra and the said FIR was quashed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in 2024 with the observation that the allegations are totally absurd and inherently improbable.
Respondents prayed for dismissal of the proceedings under Section 12 PWDV Act saying that it appeared to be maliciously instituted, however, vide impugned order dated 06.10.2025, the said application was dismissed by the Ld. Trial court.
5. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 06.10.2025, the appellants have preferred the present appeals on the following grounds:
A. The impugned order is incorrect as it proceeds despite the fact that no prima facie case is made out against the appellants.
Digitally signed by B. Hon'ble High Court has already adjudicated and MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:40:41 -0100 Page 4 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
settled the issue on merits and continuation of proceedings - civil or criminal based upon the same factual matrix that has been discredited by Hon'ble High Court is unwarranted and amounts to an abuse of process.
C. That the quashing of the FIR was not done on technical grounds, but was based on the clear and categorical finding that the allegations were improbable and disclosed no offence after thorough investigation by law enforcement authorities. The allegations leveled in the DV complaint are a verbatim reproduction of facts already investigated and categorically disbelieved by the police and subsequently quashed by the Hon'ble High Court. The respondent has failed to furnish any fresh material, incident or evidence to distinguish this proceeding from the one already dismissed. D. Though proceedings under the PWDV Act are civil in nature and follow a different standard of proof, the requirement of a genuine prima facie case still applies. In the present case, the complaint is built entirely on recycled and discredited allegations, lacking any specific dates, incidents or credible material.
E. The application under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act is nothing more than a calculated attempt to harass and malign the appellants, without any substantive basis in fact or law. The respondent has failed to prove any of the essential elements required under Section 3 of Digitally the Act.
signed by MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18
17:40:52 - Page 5 of 19
0100
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
6. Complainant filed her reply to the present appeal wherein she stated that the complaint filed by her satisfies all statutory requirements under the DV Act. Even if assuming that the facts and allegations in the complaint and the FIR are similar in nature and contents, proceedings under section 12 of DV Act are far broader in scope, encompassing physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and economic abuse. The nature and scope of allegations and the subsequent proceedings, despite based on similar facts, are different under both the DV Act and the criminal proceedings under the FIR. The order of quashing of FIR of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, heavily relied upon by the complainant in support of the present appeals has itself been challenged by the respondent before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No. 7060/2025, which is presently pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The judgment passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi quashing the FIR has limited relevance since the present proceedings are civil in nature. The quashing of the FIR neither establishes the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in the complaint filed under the DV Act nor does it restrict the trial court from independently assessing evidence and adjudicating the issues within its jurisdiction. It is further stated that the respondent, after her marriage with the appellant Vikas Malu, was Digitally signed by compelled by her husband to obtain citizenship of the MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:41:02 -0100 Page 6 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
Republic of Vanuatu and consequently surrender her Indian passport. Thereafter, she was issued a tourist visa by the Government of India, on the basis of which she continued to reside in India. However, under the terms of the said visa, the respondent is not permitted to work in India and remains dependent for her sustenance on her widowed mother who is a retired pensioner. Respondent and her husband have been separated since October 2022 due to the abuses inflicted upon her and despite being legally married, the husband has not provided a single penny towards her sustenance.
7. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has relied on (1) Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi Vs Vidhi Rawal 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1158; (2) Arulvelu & Aother Vs State (2009) 10 SCC 206;
(3) Krishna Lal Chawla& Others Vs State of Uttar Pradesh (2021) 5 SCC 435.
8. Ld. Counsel for the respondents has relied on (1) Brig Dinesh Khatri Vs State 2025 SCC OnLine Del 5622; (2) Kunapareddy @ Nookala Shanka Balaji VS Kunapareddy Swarna Kumari (2016) 11 CC 774; (3) Vishnu Dutt Sharma Vs Daya Sapra (2009) 13 SCC 729; (4) Maneesha Yadav Vs State of Uttar Pradesh 2024 SCC Online SC 643; (5) P Ganeshan Vs M. Revathy Prema Rubarani 2022 SCC OnLine MANU Mad 3598; (6) Sri Chandan Kumar Sahoo & Others Vs Putul GOEL KHARB Sahoo CRR no. 2981 of 2018 decided by Hon'ble High Court Digitally signed by MANU GOEL KHARB Date: 2026.03.18 17:41:12 -0100 Page 7 of 19 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu of Calcutta on dated 22.01.2019; (7) Ravinder Nath Verma Vs Dr. Anuradah Verma Misc. Petition no. 99 of 2024 decided by Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
9. I have heard the submissions of the parties. I have also gone through the Trial Court Record and the perused the judgments relied upon by the parties.
10. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (PWDV) Act is a beneficial piece of legislation and as per the statement of objects and reasons, the aim of this Act is to provide a remedy under the civil law with the intention to preserve the family and at the same time, to provide protection to the victims from domestic violence.
11. Section 12 of the D.V. Act gives a right to the aggrieved person or the Protection Officer to present an application before the Magistrate for one or more reliefs under the act. The various reliefs that a Magistrate can grant are set out in Chapter IV of the Act which can be broadly categorized as Protection orders, Residence orders, Monetary orders, Custody orders and compensatory reliefs which are enlisted under Section 18 to 22 of the Act. All the reliefs as mentioned above, are designed to provide a civil remedy to the aggrieved person for immediate redressal of her grievance. Digitally signed by MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:41:22 -0100 Page 8 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
12. The preamble of the Act states that this is "an Act to provide for more effective protection of the rights of women guaranteed under constitution who are victims of violence of any kind occurring within the family and for matters connected or incidental thereto."
13. "Domestic violence is defined under Section 3 as any act, omission or commission or conduct of any adult male who is or has been in domestic relationship.
"For the purposes of this Act, any act, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb or well-being whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse; or harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any dowry or other property or valuable security; or has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause (a) or clause (b); or otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical or mental, to the aggrieved person."
14. The expression "domestic relationship" is defined in Section 2(f) as follows:-
"Domestic Relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family."
15. Section 12 of the Act recognizes the right of an "aggrieved person" to present an application to the Magistrate MANU GOEL Page 9 of 19 KHARB Digitally signed by MANU GOEL KHARB Date: 2026.03.18 17:41:31 -0100 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu seeking one or more reliefs provided under the Act which are contained in sections 17 to 22. Section 2(a) of DV Act defines an "aggrieved person" as :
"Any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent"
16. So, an aggrieved person is any woman who has suffered bodily, mental or emotional harm or property damage or experienced domestic violence in any of its form while in a domestic relationship with the respondent. A woman who has not experienced such violence, or where the domestic relationship has ceased, may not qualify for relief under this Act.
17. In a petition under section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, the complainant has to first prima facie satisfy that she is an aggrieved person i.e. the complainant was subjected to domestic violence by the respondents in her shared household, then only the court can grant her the reliefs/ interim reliefs provided under Sections 18 to 22 of the DV act.
18. It is an admitted case of both the parties that the complainant lived with the appellant from March 2019 until October, 2022 and hence the complainant's entitlement to any of the reliefs provided under PWDV Act shall rest upon the MANU fact whether she is able to prove that she was subjected to GOEL KHARB Digitally signed by MANU GOEL KHARB Page 10 of 19 Date: 2026.03.18 17:41:39 -0100 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu domestic violence by the respondents during the period she stayed with the respondents.
19. To see whether the complainant has been to make out a prime facie case in her favor let us go through the contents of her petition under section 12 of DV Act. At the same time, it would also be relevant to see whether the facts mentioned by her in the petition u/ Section 12 DV Act are similar or not to the facts which are mentioned in FIR No. 525/2022, PS Kapashera because it is urged by the appellants that no new facts are mentioned in the DV petition and that petition is not maintainable on the same facts which formed the basis of FIR that has already been quashed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide order dated 16.02.2024.
20. For the said purpose, it would be relevant to see the accusations leveled by the complainant in her application under Section 12 of DV Act vis-a-vis the accusations made in the FIR. The initial paragraphs of the petition from Para No. 2(a) to 2(d) contain the preliminary submissions and provide the general introduction and basic background about the parties. Thereafter, Para No. 2(e) to 2(l) mentions about the incidents of sexual violence by the respondents and the said paragraphs also form part of the alleged FIR. Further, even MANU the Para No. 2(o) to 2(t) also talk about the same facts as GOEL KHARB Digitally signed by stated in the FIR. Remaining paragraphs i.e. 2(m) mentions MANU GOEL KHARB Date: 2026.03.18 17:41:52 -0100 Page 11 of 19 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu that the citizenship of complainant was changed from Republic of India to Republic of Vanuatu in the year 2020 and she came to know this fact in 2021 and it is alleged that the same was done by Respondent No.1 with ill and hidden motive; in Para 2(n) she alleges that respondent no.1 did not want to have a child and that respondent no. 2 to 4 became very aggressive after knowing that the applicant wants to have a baby and the complainant came to know that respondents no.2 to 4 would have killed the baby if she had conceived.
21. From a reading of the contents of the petition under Section 12 DV Act filed before the Ld. Trial Court vis-a-vis the contents of FIR No.525/22, evidently all the facts mentioned in the FIR have been reproduced verbatim in the petition u/s 12 of DV Act, barring the allegations of change of citizenship and reluctance of respondent no.1 to have a baby mentioned in para 2 (n) and 2(m) respectively. So, there is no substantial difference in the facts of the DV petition and the FIR.
22. The reliefs as provided under the DV Act would be available only if petitioner is able to prima facie show through the allegations made by her that she is an aggrieved person. As already discussed above, the facts as mentioned in the petition contain only general allegations whereas there are no specific facts pleaded in the petition. All the incidents of MANU GOEL KHARB Page 12 of 19 Digitally signed by MANU GOEL KHARB Date: 2026.03.18 17:42:03 -0100 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu sexual violence committed upon complainant by respondents no. 2 to 4 and of non-consensual sexual relationship by respondent no.1 have already been dealt by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the quashing order dated 16.02.2024. In the petition in hand, also, complainant has accused her husband, step son and step daughters of sexually assaulting her and the said allegations have already been discredited and disbelieved by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The aforesaid FIR now stands quashed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on merits, observing that "the allegations made by the complainant in the complaint dated 15.11.2022 and subsequently, including her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C, do not inspire confidence and appear to be highly improbable."
23. Complainant went into a revision against the said order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, however, the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 04.04.2025 issued notice, limited only for the purpose of exploring the possibility of amicable settlement and no notice has been issued till date in the main SLP filed by complainant which means that as on date, the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, quashing the FIR no. 525/2022, PS Kapasehra, is the final order with respect to the facts on the basis of which the Digitally signed by MANU said FIR was registered.
MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:42:13 -0100 Page 13 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
24. Ld. Counsel for the complainant also argued before this court that in her reply to the appeal, at page no. 30, complainant has filed a hand written note, alleged to be written by the appellant Vikas Malu wherein he has admitted having slapped his wife and it is stated that same shows the act of domestic violence committed by the appellant. It is rightly pointed out by Ld. Counsel for the appellants that this ground was raised by the complainant before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in FIR No.525/22 and was discredited by the Hon'ble High Court which is evident from a perusal of the reply filed by the complainant in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi to the quashing petition.
25. The allegations of rape, unnatural sex and non-
consensual sexual violence made in the petition under DV Act and in the FIR are overlapping and the court cannot be expected to take a view contrary to what has already been observed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, more so, when the FIR was quashed not on the basis of any settlement but on merits and even the attempt of complainant to subsequent challenge to those findings has not been permitted by the Hon'ble Apex Court till date as no notice has been issued upon her petition.
26. So far as the remaining instances mentioned in the petition u/s 12 DV Act, it is observed that no specific instances Digitally signed by MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:42:21 - Page 14 of 19 0100 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu of beatings and physical or emotional abuse have been narrated by the applicant and the allegations made in para no. No. 2(a) to 2(d) are general in nature. It is not the general rhetoric which has to be tested by leading evidence and evidence has to be led on specific facts. Regarding the allegations made in Para 2(m) regarding change of citizenship, the complainant has failed to point out as to how she was defrauded by the respondent/husband in the matter of change of her citizenship whereas the process of change of citizenship can be initiated only upon the specific written request of the applicant himself/herself. Even in Para 2(n), she simply states that respondent/husband did not want to have a child and no further role has been assigned to the respondents as to how they were instrumental in denial of the right of the complainant to have a child. Merely saying that respondent no. 2 was an MBBS and knows how to abort a child in the womb, would not make a prima facie case against respondent no. 2 of committing violence upon the complainant without any pleading specific overt act on her part.
27. All the reliefs under the PWDV Act revolves around the fact that the complainant is an aggrieved person and if the court, prima facie, feels that she is not an aggrieved person, then there is no case made out to summon the respondents and to provide any of the reliefs to the complainant. From the allegations mentioned in the pleadings, the complainant has MANU GOEL KHARB Digitally signed by MANU GOEL Page 15 of 19 KHARB Date: 2026.03.18 17:42:29 -0100 CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025 Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu not been able to make out a prima facie case of domestic violence against any of the respondents herein, entitling her to any of the reliefs provided by the DV Act.
28. Application filed by the complainant under Section 12 PWDV Act, without there being any new facts, can be termed as multiplicity of litigation which burdens the legal system, leading to overburdened courts and resources. They not only strain the judicial system but also has devastating consequences on the individuals who are on the receiving end. The complainant can approach other forums and explore alternative remedies if she claims any other relief like maintenance etc which can be granted to her under section 125 Cr.P.C. or Section 18 HAMA.
29. It is noted that there is a growing trend of exaggerated and sweeping accusations in matrimonial cases, either under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code or Section 12 of PWDV Act and such misuse of the law has a detrimental effect on the institution of marriage. In the case of Mukesh Bansal v. State of U.P., Criminal Revision no. 1126 of 2022, Justice Rahul Chaturvedi speaking for the Allahabad High Court observed:
"It is a question of a common observation that every matrimonial case is being exaggerated manifold with all the Digitally signed by pungent and castic allegations of dowry-related atrocities MANU MANU GOEL involving the husband and all family members. This rampant GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
practice nowadays has adversely affected our social fiber, 2026.03.18 17:42:38 -0100 Page 16 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
especially in northern India."
30. In the case in hand, once a Higher Court has already adjudicated upon the facts on merits, initiating another set of litigation on the same facts is nothing but a misuse of legal provisions by filing cases against the husband and step-
children which can perpetuate stereotypes and hinder genuine cases of abuse. One complaint should not lead to multiple cases and the pragmatic realities of matrimonial disputes needs to be considered. It is to be understood that DV Act is a beneficial piece of legislation to help destitute woman and it is not a versatile toolkit possessed by women for filing cases against their partners/husbands such as cruelty, sexual harassment, and domestic violence. The misuse of the Domestic Violence Act not only disrupts lives but also erodes the foundational fabric of marital relationships. The collateral damage inflicted by false allegations is also immeasurable.
31. In the case of Shamshada Akhter Vs Ajaz Parvaiz Shah, it was held by the Ld. Judge as follows:
"10. It is quite obvious that the object of Protection of Women (from Domestic Violence) Act, is to give protection to women from violence which takes place when they live in such domestic relation. This is to protect legitimate and genuine cases where the aggrieved person does not indulge in acts which defeats the purpose and object of the legislation. Domestic Violence Act has not been enacted to cause harassment to the other spouse or to further aggravate the matrimonial discord to the extent of throwing the respondent Digitally out of his own house. This legislation cannot be allowed to be used in a manner that it spoils life of couples living signed by MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:42:47 -0100 Page 17 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
peacefully. An act which is disproportionate to the level of protection can also be counter productive and instead of giving protection to the legitimate cases of domestic violence, it may have the potential to destroy marital institution. Therefore, it is important to sift and weigh cases to preserve the efficacy of Domestic Violence Act for legitimate and genuine cases."
32. There is a delicate balance between empowering genuine victims and preventing the misuse of legal provisions and it is the court's duty to ensure that legal mechanisms are not weaponized for personal vendettas. This court is of the opinion that the present petition is nothing but an abuse of the process of law.
33. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this court is of the opinion that the allegation made against the appellants, are not adequate, to proceed with the case against them and complainant has failed to prima facie show that she is an aggrieved person. On the face of it, the allegations made against the appellants are not sustainable and admittedly, a complaint has been already lodged before the SHO, PS Kapasehra which culminated into FIR no. 525/2022 and which now stands quashed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Now, the very same cause of action, has been repeated here and it would amount to 'double jeopardy' against the appellants.
34. In the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be said that Digitally signed by MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:42:56 -0100 Page 18 of 19
CA no. 739/2025 CA No.740/2025
Vikas Malu VS Saanvi Malu Harshita Malu & Ors. Vs. Saanvi Malu
there is a prima facie case against the appellants. Accordingly, both appeals are allowed and order dated 06.10.2025 of the Ld. Trial Court is set aside and consequently, the application under Section 12 of DV Act is hereby dismissed.
35. Trial Court Record be sent back to the Ld. Trial Court/Successor court alongwith a copy of this order.
36. Appeal file be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Pronounced in the open Court today i.e. 18.03.2026 (Manu Goel Kharb) Special Judge (NDPS)-02, Digitally signed by Dwarka Courts, New Delhi MANU MANU GOEL GOEL KHARB KHARB Date:
2026.03.18 17:43:02 -0100 Page 19 of 19