The Delhi High Court has affirmed the summons issued to Uttar Pradesh MLA Raghuraj Pratap Singh, popularly known as Raja Bhaiya, in a domestic violence case initiated by his wife, Bhanvi Kumari Singh. The couple is currently embroiled in a contentious divorce process after 28 years of marriage, with Raja Bhaiya seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion, while Bhanvi Singh alleges domestic violence, an extramarital affair, and financial misconduct.
Challenge to Court Jurisdiction
Raghuraj Pratap Singh brought forth a challenge against a July 2024 order from the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at the Rouse Avenue Courts, which is designated for handling criminal matters involving Members of Parliament (MPs) and MLAs. His legal stance was that the MP/MLA court lacked jurisdiction over the case filed under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDV Act), arguing that it should have been initiated at the jurisdictional court in Saket.
Court’s Ruling
On May 30, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivered the judgment, confirming that the Rouse Avenue Courts, being designated for MPs and MLAs, serve as competent magistrate courts under the PWDV Act. This allows them to conduct proceedings against sitting legislators.
Justice Sharma emphasized the importance of having a specialized court system to ensure that cases involving elected officials are resolved in a timely manner, thereby preserving public trust in the justice system and democratic institutions. The court clarified that the centralized adjudication system cannot be undermined simply because the PWDV Act involves civil reliefs, particularly when these proceedings are directed by a court exercising criminal jurisdiction.
Arguments and Observations
Raja Bhaiya’s legal team argued that the PWDV Act’s proceedings are mainly civil, thus outside the criminal court’s purview meant for elected representatives. They also accused Bhanvi Singh of “forum shopping” by retracting a petition filed previously at Saket Courts and refiling it at Rouse Avenue.
More Read
The High Court dismissed these arguments, underscoring that the Domestic Violence Act, while providing civil remedies, includes criminal enforcement aspects, such as penalties for breaching protection orders. It further noted that proceedings under the PWDV Act are designated to judicial and metropolitan magistrates and governed by criminal procedures.
The legal representation for Raghuraj Pratap Singh comprised Advocates Dhruv Gupta and Anubhav Garg, while Advocates Arvind Kumar Shukla, Surbhi Khanna, Neena Shukla, and Kushagra Sinha represented Bhanvi Kumari Singh.
