Maxx, copied from there, look forward to more comments from learned members here
@rsaxena. I read both the judgements . I am not a lawyer, but I don't think that MP judgement can be used to argue for quashing of DV complaint based on delay in filing a complaint. Also it does not support Dalvi judgement, at least not completely.
Here is why
1.) This is most important. The reason that the judge quashed DV complaint was because of this
a.) FIR filed by complainant was quashed by Supreme court
b.) Contents of DV complaint were exactly the same as that of FIR
c.) No allegations of Domestic Violence was made between the duration when the FIR was filed and DV complaint was filed.
So, what the judge is saying that if SC thinks FIR was bullsh*t then this DV complaint is bullsh*t too
2.) Regarding the time delay, the judge is of the following opinion
a.) DV act by itself doesn't lay down any restrictions
b.) Although it is guided by CrPC, Section 468 of CrPC does not apply here (In my opinion, that's because DV act is in principle a civil act, and CrPC 468 tries to map cognizance in a case with the punishment duration of an offence and time delay in filing the complaint)
c.) The Judge agrees in principle with the Dalvi judgement that the complaint should be filed within reasonable timeframe
So, while the MP judge agrees in principle, it says unequivocally that there is no technical limitation for time limit in filing a DV complaint. Moreover, one thing to note is that in Dalvi judgement the wife hadn't filed any complaint (no NC, no 498a) whatsoever during the duration they were separated. So judge took the view that if you are separated for sucha long duration, the domestic relationship doesn't exist anymore. Hence the act doesn't apply. (In my opinion)
This is just my interpretation, you would want to take it with a pinch of salt.