Advertisement

Updated February 14th, 2024 at 11:56 IST

Mumbai Court Rejects Woman's Plea, Says Husband's Financial Support to Mother Not Domestic Violence

During the pendency of the woman's plea, the trial court (magistrate) granted her an interim maintenance of Rs 3,000 per month.

Reported by: Digital Desk
Mumbai Court Rejects Woman's Plea, Says Husband's Financial Support to Mother Not Domestic Violence
Mumbai Court Rejects Woman's Plea, Says Husband's Financial Support to Mother Not Domestic Violence | Image:Freepik
Advertisement

Mumbai: A sessions court here has dismissed a plea of a woman challenging a magistrate court order over her complaint against her husband and in-laws, observing that a man giving time and money to his mother cannot be considered as domestic violence.

Additional sessions judge (Dindoshi court) Ashish Ayachit, in the order passed on Tuesday, also said the allegations against the respondents are vague and ambiguous and there is nothing to prove that they subjected the applicant (woman) to domestic violence.

Advertisement

The woman, who works as an assistant in the 'Mantralaya' (state secretariat), had filed a complaint before a magistrate court under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act for an order seeking protection, monetary relief and compensation.

She alleged that her husband got married to her by suppressing the mental illness of his mother and deceived her.

Advertisement

The woman also claimed her mother-in-law opposed her job and used to harass her and that her husband and his mother quarrelled with her.

She said her husband stayed abroad for his job from September 1993 to December 2004. Whenever he came to India on leave, he used to visit his mother and send her Rs 10,000 every year. He also spent money for his mother's eye operation, the woman said.

Advertisement

She also claimed harassment by the other members of her in-laws' family.

Her in-laws, however, denied all the allegations.

Advertisement

The man claimed that she never accepted him as her husband and used to level false allegations against him.

According to him, he had filed a divorce petition before a family court due to her cruelties.

Advertisement

He also alleged that his wife had withdrawn Rs 21.68 lakh from his NRE (non-resident external) account without any information and purchased a flat with the amount.

During the pendency of the woman's plea, the trial court (magistrate) granted her an interim maintenance of Rs 3,000 per month.

Advertisement

After recording of evidence of the woman and others, the magistrate court dismissed her plea and vacated the interim directions and reliefs granted to her during the pendency of the proceeding.

The woman subsequently filed a criminal appeal before the sessions court.

Advertisement

After perusal of the evidence, the sessions court held that the allegations against the respondents are "vague and ambiguous" and there is nothing to prove that they subjected the woman to domestic violence.

"It is a matter of record that the applicant is an 'assistant' working in Mantralaya and getting a salary. It is revealed from the entire evidence that her grievance is that, the respondent, her husband, is giving time and money to his mother, which cannot be considered as domestic violence," the court said.

Advertisement

"Careful reading of the entire evidence of the applicant and respondent number 1(husband), I am of the opinion that the applicant has miserably failed to prove that she was subjected to domestic violence," the judge said.

The court also said held that this proceeding has been initiated only after the issuance of a notice by the woman's husband for seeking divorce.

Advertisement

The woman was not entitled for any relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, it said.

The court further said the argument that the woman's daughter is unmarried and therefore maintenance may be awarded to the latter cannot be accepted.

Advertisement

" I do not think that the applicant is entitled to recover maintenance for major daughter," who has an independent remedy available as per provisions of the law, the judge said.

The impugned judgment of the trial court does not require interference by the hands of this court, the judge added.

Advertisement

(This is an agency copy. Except the headline, Republic Digital has not edited the article)

Advertisement

Published February 14th, 2024 at 11:54 IST

Your Voice. Now Direct.

Send us your views, we’ll publish them. This section is moderated.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending Quicks

Sydney policewoman's heroic act
3 minutes ago
Harman Baweja producing film on Nazir Wani
3 minutes ago
17 Indians Among Crew of Ship Detained by Iran Near UAE
9 minutes ago
Rohit Sharma and Hardik Pandya
10 minutes ago
PM Modi plays online games with gamers
12 minutes ago
amit shah
22 minutes ago
Rutuja Bhosale
23 minutes ago
A 'Barack Obama' gas station in Ireland has gone viral
27 minutes ago
Testicular Cancer
34 minutes ago
Representative image of CBI
36 minutes ago
Wrestler Radhika
36 minutes ago
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Whatsapp logo