Crpc202 not followed in a pwdv act case

Is it valid at law, that a magistrate may issue process / summons on the same date as a DV Act complaint is filed against a husband who resides 2000 Kms from the jurisdiction of the court? If not, having mentioned this in Criminal Appeals before the sessions court was not even given any mention in the appeal judgement (which had many contentions) and husband has moved high court in Criminal Revision seeking relief that since CrPC 202 was not done, applicaiton of Judicial Mind has not happened. High Court in first hearing remarked, "This is a husband wife dispute, not a murder case.". Husband calmly replied, arguing in person, when the dispute has travelled from the bedroom, to the drawing room to the community hall to a Court of Law, then law must be applied. High Court has directed arguments on next date. Husband also mentioned Case filed six months 2 days from date of admitted / submitted date of desertion /leaving by wife. S 468 CrPC stipulates limitaiton is six months for alleged crimes punishable only with a fine and hence too case not maintainable. Judge smiled. Husband pushed envelope further saying wife has admitted in this complaint that in the past there was a settlement at Supreme Cort of India of her two simultaneous 498A cases and where after filing compromise petition and beginning to live with the husband the final orders date came 8 months later. On this date, husband pursuaded the wife that since his trust in her is completely broken if she will make an allegation on her own father and brother that they engineered the false cases he will keep her on 7th cloud. Husband has continued contentions in lowest court and appeal court that she has come to courts with unclean hands as her own father had filed an intervention petition trying to block this settlement and she in rage has made these remarks and she has not disclosed this at or during the proceedings of this latest DV case. If at all husband would have used really any inducement or co-ercion on wife, courts below cannot entertain a petition containing such remarks as this would tantamount to contempting the Supreme Court and any opportunity given to wife as per appeal judgement (that is currently challenged in High Court) that wife will have responsibility to prove she gave such statements to supreme court under inducement is also undermining supreme court and hence such a trial is not tenable at law and if a trial is not tenable case is unfit to be before the court. Can CrPC 202 not being done in DV Case be a cause of relief? Can CrPC 468 with specifics of this case be a cause of relief? Can Article 141 of the Constitution of India and the twisting of presentment of the prior settlement at Supreme Court be a basis for relief ? What do learned advocates on this forum feel?