SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

GUJARAT HIGH COURT
J.B. Pardiwala, J.
Bhartiben Bipinbhai Tamboli —Applicant
versus
State of Gujarat and Ors. —Respondents
Special Criminal Application (Domestic Violence) No.5672 of 2016 With Special Criminal Application No.9799 of 2016
Decided on 8.1.2018

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Applicant in Criminal Application No.5672 of 2016:Mr. KS Nanavati, Senior Advocate for Nanavati Associates, Advocate
For the Applicant in Criminal Application No.9799 of 2016:Mr. Soparkar, Senior Advocate with Dipen Desai, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2 to 4 in Both appeal:Mr. Jay M Thakkar, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1 in Both appeal: Mr. DM Devnani, APP

IMPORTANT POINT
Infidelity can occur even in strongest of marital relationship.

Headnote:(A) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005—Section 12—Domestic violence—Complaint—Maintainability—Even if husband showers all riches of world upon wife while maintaining illicit relationship with another lady, same would hardly be of any consequence—There are allegations against mother-in-law of pressurizing daughter-in-law to consent for giving divorce to her husband so that the husband can get married with lady with whom he has an extramarital affair—There are allegations that e Stridhan property is in possession of mother-in-law and same has been kept in a locker jointly operated by husband and his mother—There are many other allegations which probably may constitute a domestic violence if ultimately found to be true—Wife should be permitted to lead appropriate evidence before Court concerned to seek appropriate relief as provided in the Act—Effects of extramarital affairs are devastating and victims may take long to get over misery—Infidelity can occur even in strongest of marital relationship—An extramarital affair challenges sanctity and strength of a relationship causing turmoil in personal and social world of people—An extramarital affair wreaks havoc bringing in several negative effects, causing unbearable emotional pain and mental trauma for faithful partner who never even thought of going though such a phase—No case is made out for terminating proceedings initiated by wife under Domestic Violence Act at this stage—Court must give opportunity to wife and children to lead appropriate evidence for the purpose of seeking appropriate relief in accordance with law—Applications dismissed. (Paras 40, 41, 43, 54, 55, 57, 60 and 61)

       (B) Family Law—Domestic violence—Domestic violence in this Country is rampant and several women encounter violence in some form or other or almost every day—However, it is least reported form of cruel behaviour—A woman resigns her fate to never ending cycle of enduring violence and discrimination as a daughter, a sister, a wife, a mother, a partner or a single woman in her lifetime—This non-retaliation by women coupled with absence of laws addressing women’s issues, ignorance of existing laws enacted for women and societal attitude makes women vulnerable—Reason why most cases of domestic violence are never reported is due to social stigma of society and attitude of women themselves where women are expected to be subservient not just to their male counterparts but also to male’s relatives. (Para 21)

       Result: Special Criminal Applications dismissed.

ORDER

J.B. Pardiwala, J.—In the Affairs of this World, Men are saved, not by Faith, but by the Lack of it. Benjamin Frenklin.

2. As the issues raised in both the captioned applications are the same and the prayer is also to quash the selfsame proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

3. The Special Criminal Application No.5672 of 2016 has been filed by the mother-in-law of the respondent no.2. The respondents nos.3 and 4 are the grandchildren of the writ-applicant. The respondent no.2 is married to one Mehul Bipinbhai Tamboli i.e. the son of the writ-applicant. In the wedlock, the respondents nos.3 and 4 were born.

4. The writ-applicant herein has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“26(A) be pleased to quash qua the present petitioners the impugned complaint registered as Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.131 of 2016 and pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court, Bhavnagar and the impugned Order dated 05.04.2016 passed thereunder by the Ld. 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhavnagar;

(B) pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to stay further proceedings under the impugned complaint registered as Criminal Miscellaneous Application no.131 of 2016 and pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court, Bhavnagar and the impugned order dated 05.04.2016 passed thereunder by the Ld. 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhavnagar;

(C) An exparte ad interim relief in terms of prayer (B) above may kindly be granted;

(D) such other and further relief/s as may be deemed just and proper may kindly be granted in the interest of justice.”

5. The case of the writ-applicant (mother-in-law) as pleaded in her writ-application is as under:-

“3. The petitioner is a Senior Citizen of this country and her fundamental rights are guaranteed under the Constitution of India. The petitioner is a housewife and belongs to a highly respected family. She is mother-in-law of Respondent No.1 and is opponent No.2 in the impugned complaint.

4. Respondent no.2 is wife of Mehulbhai Bipinbhai Tamboli, who is Opponent No.1 in the impugned complaint.

5. Respondent No.2 is an educated person herself and her brother, Baijubhai, is a medical practitioner. Uncle of Respondent No.2, Dr. Rajubhai J. Dave is practicing for the last 35 years in Bhavnagar as a Child Specialist.

6. The Petitioner submits that the marriage between Respondent No.2 and Mehulbhai Bipinbhai Tamboli was a love marriage and took place on 16.2.1993 according to Hindu tradition. Out of the wedlock, Respondent No.2 and Mehulbhai Bipinbhai Tamboli have a 20 year old daughter, Anushree and a 15 year old son, who are respectively Respondents Nos.3 and 4 herein.

7. The petitioner has been residing with her husband, Bipinbhai Fulchandbhai Tamboli at a bungalow on Plot No.2294, Hilldrive Road, Bhavnagar for decades and was residing there when the marriage of Rspondent No.2 and Mehulbhai Bipinbhai Tamboli took place on 16.02.1993.

8. The Petitioner submits that the family of the Petitioner had very well accepted Respondent No.2 as a daughter-in-law, which is evident from the fact that for about 13 years after the said marriage, Respondent No.2 and Mehulbhai Bipinbhai Tamboli lived in a joint family. The Petitioner submits that the family of the Petitioner including Respondent No.2 celebrated festivals and various family occasions and took vacations including a trip in 1998 to the US where the younger brother of Mehulbhai Bipinbhai Tamboli was studying and even visited Disneyworld in Florida, USA. Younger brother of Mehulbhai Bipinbhai Tamboli got married in 2001 and even after his marriage, there was joint living in the Tamboli family.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top