2014 Supreme(Bom) 365

In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
MRIDULA R. BHATKAR, J.
Aradhana Walkade
Versus
Chandrashekar Vaidya & Another
Criminal Writ Petition No. 126 of 2013
Decided On : 13-02-2014

Headnote:Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Sections 2(f), 2(g) and 12 - Complaint under Section 12. - Within purport of "domestic violence" a woman who is a divorcee has remedy available to initiate proceedings under Act. - Under the Act, respondent is never a female but always an adult male. It states that the respondent, who is or who has been in domestic relationship with an aggrieved person. Thus, Section 2(q) also refers to the relationship which is in existence, that is, in the present or which was in the past. Thus, Section 2(q) is in consonance with the terms and phrases used in first half of Section 2(f) of the Act. The verb used in Section 2(f) in the subsequent portion that "when they are related in consanguinity……………." though indicates present tense, the entire section as a whole is to be read in context with Section 2(q) and also 3 - Explanation a(i). Then it is amply clear that legislators while enacting those provisions intended to take account of the present domestic relationship as well as the past domestic relationship. In legislative wisdom on considering the ground realities of the life and the matrimonial relationship and further the responsibility which is required to be shouldered by a woman, the concept of domestic relationship is given wider meaning and thus, relationship which is in existence so also the matrimonial relationship which was in the past both are covered within the purport of Section 2(f) and 2(q). Under sub-section (q) of Section 2, the law makers have deliberately used the word "aggrieved person" and who can take action against the respondent but in the proviso instead of using the term "aggrieved person" the term as "aggrieved wife" is substituted. Thus, the proviso carves out a class of aggrieved persons, that is, (i) an aggrieved wife (ii) female living in relationship. This class of aggrieved persons may also file the complaint against a particular class of respondent which is specified in the proviso, that is, a relative of husband or a male partner. Thus, this provision enables an aggrieved wife or female in relationship to take action under the D.V. Act against relatives of the husband or the male partner. The specific use of the word "aggrieved wife" and further phrases, female living in relationship necessarily refers to a present tense. In the proviso the term an "ex-wife" or an "aggrieved person" is not used, which is found in the principal section of 2(q). Thus, the proviso enables to remove the ambiguity in respect of past matrimonial relationship as it is an exception to the main section and adds more and further remedy to a particular class of an aggrieved person against persons who fall in a specific category i.e. relations of the husband. Thus, an ex-wife has no remedy available against the relatives of the ex-husband. By virtue of the proviso she is not an aggrieved person, though otherwise she is under the Act for taking action against the husband only. Thus, there is no doubt that within the purport of "domestic violence" a woman who is a divorcee has remedy available to initiate the proceedings.

       Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 3(iv) - Offence of economic abuse. - If an aggrieved person is deprived of maintenance granted by Court, it can be considered as an economic abuse. - Definition of "economic abuse" means that if a woman is deprived of any economic or financial resources to which she is entitled reliefs under the law, or custom whether payable under the order of the Court or otherwise, to her as an aggrieved person out of necessity can be granted. The definition further has mentioned the word "maintenance". Therefore, if there is an order of the Court to pay maintenance to the "aggrieved person" then if such maintenance is stopped or aggrieved person is deprived of such maintenance, it can be considered as an economic abuse. Maintenance also relates back to past matrimonial relationship. Thus Section 3(iv) of the Act also fortifies the interpretation of "domestic relationship." extending to the past relationship. The word "otherwise" used after the order of the Court is again broad and can be stretched for a proper legal interpretation. Thus, the obligation to look after the children can be taken in the sweep of word "otherwise."