JUDGMENT :

1. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 5th October 2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, in Criminal Appeal No. 75 of 2019 confirming the Judgment and Order dated 11th November 2019 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baramati in Miscellaneous Application No.573 of 2018.

2. Respondent No.1, who initially was Transgender, filed a proceeding under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 as a woman under the Domestic Violence Act. According to the case of respondent No.1, she converted her gender from Transgender to female by performing surgery on 1st June 2016. On 21st July 2016, there was a marriage between the petitioner and respondent. Due to differences between the parties, the respondent filed Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.573 of 2018 under the provision of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. In the said proceedings respondent filed an application seeking interim maintenance. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baramati, by order dated 11th November 2019, directed payment of Rs.12,000/- per month from the date of application. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, by the impugned Judgment and Order, the said appeal has been dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the respondent does not fall within the definition of aggrieved person as such right has been conferred on "women" in a domestic relationship. Additionally, it is submitted that there is no certificate issued to her under Section 7 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, and therefore she cannot be treated as a woman under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Finally, he submitted that in the absence of cogent evidence of the petitioners' income, the order of payment of Rs.12,000/- per month could not be justified.

4. Learned advocate for the respondent has filed a medical certificate of Doctor and in that certificate held as under:-

This is to certify that Ms. Sakshi Vitthal Khatri, Age-24 yrs, female has been appears for vaginoplasty (Net vagiana creation by penile in versien technique with penile amptutation) urethroplasty & Bilateral orchidetomy in sicinovate layer & Cosmetic surgery center.

5. Per contra, the learned advocate for the respondent relying on the judgment of Apex Court in the Case of National Legal Services Authority Vs. Union of India and others, in Writ Petition (Civil) No.400 of 2012 dated 15th April 2014, submitted that the Apex Court, by the said judgment, recognized the right of transgender persons to decide self-identified Transgender. Inviting the attention of this Court in paragraph 105 of the said judgment, it is submitted that the Apex Court has recognized the right of a person who has changed his/her sex in tune with his/her gender characteristics and perception can be granted due recognition to the gender identity based on the reassigned sex after under undergoing SRS. She also submitted that the petitioner's income exceeds Rs. 25,000/- per day; therefore, the direction to pay Rs.12,000/- is legal and proper.

6. Rival contentions call for consideration.

7. The issue involved is as to whether a transgender person who converts himself into a woman by performing surgery can be termed as an aggrieved person within the meaning of Section 2(a) of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. To decide the question, relevant provisions of the statute need to be noted which are as under:-

2.(a)“aggrieved person” means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent;

2.(f) “domestic relationship” means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relatio