IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A. S. OKA, J.
Archana Hemant Naik – Appellant
Vs.
Urmilaben I. Naik & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Revision Application No.590 of 2008
Decided on : 25th August, 2009.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 2(q) - Respondent - Meaning thereof - Held - Any adult male person or has been in domestic relationship with aggrieved person - Against whom the aggrieved person has sought any relief under Act of 2005.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Sections 12 and 2(a) - Initiation of Proceeding - Held - Proceeding can be initiated by way of making an application to Court of Magistrate - Application is to be filed by an aggrieved person - Application can be also filed by protection officer or by any other person an behalf of aggrieved.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Sections 19(1) and 2(q), Proviso - Relative - Meaning thereof - It is not restrictive to the male relative of husband or male relative of male partner - It includes female relative.
The third opponent is the mother-in-law of the revision applicant. The third opponent in the said application has been impleaded as the first respondent in this revision application. The fifth opponent in the said application under section 12 of the said Act is the sister-in-law of the revision applicant. The sixth opponent in the application is the husband of the fifth opponent.
2. According to the case made out by the revision applicant, she was residing along with her husband and her in-laws in the house by the name Jagan Villa at Nani-Daman. According to the case of the revision applicant, on 22nd June, 2004 in the afternoon, she was assaulted and thrown out of the said house by her husband. It is alleged that the revision applicant was working as a teacher and while she was staying with her husband, her entire salary was being taken by her husband and inlaws and therefore she has no savings. In the application, she has referred to the criminal complaint filed by her as well as a petition for divorce filed by her husband against her. By filing the said application under section 12 of the said Act, she claimed maintenance from her husband. She also claimed house accommodation or share of her husband in her father-in-Law's two bungalows by the name Jagan Villa and Mani Villa at Nani Daman. In the said application under section 12 of the said Act, the revision applicant applied for interim order under section 23 of the said Act. The said application was opposed by the opponents to the said application. A reply was filed by the opponents to the said application for contesting the said application. The allegations made by the revision applicant were denied in the said reply. It was contended that the proceedings against the said Act can be initiated only against the male persons and therefore, the proceedings as against the opponent nos.3, 4 and 5 was not maintainable. It was contended that the opponent no.1- Husband has no title to the houses in respect of which reliefs were claimed. It is contended that the opponent no. 1 was residing in the house of his mother, i.e., the first respondent herein and therefore the house in respect of which relief was sought by the revision applicant cannot be termed as a sharer household. The learned Magistrate by order dated 5th March, 2008 granted interim relief directing the husband of the revision applicant to allow the residence of the applicant with him in house 14-113/C (hereinafter referred to as the said house). The learned Magistrate directed the opponent no.2 Manoj and his sister Varsha not to create any panic in any form of harassment to the applicant. The husband was directed to observe and follow the order. The officer in charge of Nani Daman police station was directed to make available one male and one female constable to the applicant as per her demand for her protection. The protection officer was directed to assist the revision applicant for enforcement of the order.
3. The first respondent (mother-in-law of the revision applicant) preferred an appeal for challenging the said order. The main contention in the appeal was that the first respondent purchased two plots at Narayan Park, Nani Daman under a sale deed dated 5th February, 1998 and thereafter, she had constructed the said house bearing No.14/113/C (Jagan villa). The case is that the said house is exclusively owned by her.
4. By Judgment and Order dated 2nd September, 2008, the Appeal was allowed by setting aside
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.