Back
TELANGANA HIGH COURT
K. Surender, J.
C.D. Ravindernath – Petitioner
versus
Srilatha and Another – Respondents
Criminal Petition No.7027 of 2022 and Criminal Petition No.7033 of 2022
Decided on 28.4.2023
For the Petitioners:Sri M. Vijaya Kanth, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Sri Katta Laxmi Prasad, Sri S. Sudershan, Advocates.
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Under DVC Act, reliefs are segregated under different provisions from Sections 18 to 22 of Act and there is clear demarcation.
(2) Words of statute have to be understood in their natural ordinary sense in accordance with their grammatical meaning, unless it leads to some absurdity or if intent of Legislature suggests otherwise.
Headnote:
(A) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Sections 18 and 31 – Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2006 – Rule 15(7) – Breach of orders of maintenance and compensation – Penalty – Under DVC Act, reliefs are segregated under different provisions from Sections 18 to 22 of Act and there is clear demarcation – If legislature had intended that any breach of order made while granting reliefs under Sections 18 to 22 be punishable under Section 31, same would have been said in clear terms – Since there is no ambiguity in any of reliefs that can be granted under DVC Act and clearly demarcated, Courts need not search for any other interpretation other than actual meaning of words – Section 31 of DVC Act prescribes penalty for breach of protection order made under Section 18 – Said provision cannot be read as a penalty for residence orders under Section 19 or monetary reliefs under Section 20 or custody orders under Section 21 or compensation order under Section 22 – Under Rule 15(7), if there is any resistance to enforcement of protection order as ordered by Court either respondent or any other person acting on his behalf can be dealt with under Section 31 of Act. (Paras 15, 17, 18 and 20)
(B) Interpretation of Statute – Rule of Literal Construction – Words of statute have to be understood in their natural ordinary sense in accordance with their grammatical meaning, unless it leads to some absurdity or if intent of Legislature suggests otherwise – Words of statute must prima facie be given their ordinary meaning – Court cannot read into provisions of an enactment to arrive at a different meaning from what words in the statute suggest – Intention can only be inferred from words used and cannot draw inferences contrary to meaning of words, unless permitted by law to refer to aids to interpretation. (Paras 15 and 16)
Result: Criminal Petitions allowed.
ORDER
Criminal Petition No.7027 of 2022 is filed to quash STC No.4 of 2022 on the file of II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri.
2. Criminal Petition No.7033 of 2022 is filed to quash STC No.3 of 2022 on the file of II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri.
3. The short question involved in both the cases is whether Section 31 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short ‘the DVC Act’) which prescribes penalty for breaching ‘protection order’ under section 18 of the Act, be extended to prosecution for beach of orders of maintenance and compensation granted by the Court under Sections 20 and 22 respectively.
4. The petitioner in Criminal Petition No.7027 is the husband of the 1st respondent and petitioners in Criminal Petition No.7033 of 2022 are the husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the 1st respondent/wife. The 1st respondent/wife filed DVC No.46 of 2014 and the Court had granted maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to be paid to the respondent/wife and Rs.20,000/- per month to the son, which includes medical and educational expenses. The amount was directed to be deposited into the account of the respondent/wife. It was also ordered that compensation of Rs.10.00 lakhs to be paid by all the respondents, who are the husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law.
5. For the reason of not paying the compensation amount as directed and also the maintenance, which was directed to be paid by the husband, two different applications were filed under Section 31 of the Act to take cognizance and punish the petitioners in accordance with Section 31 of the Act.
6. Learned Magistrate having considered the applications made by the respondent/wife directed that STC No.04 of 2022 be registered for not paying maintenance and STC No.3 of 2022 registered for not paying compensation, against husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that Section 31 of the Act can only be invoked for breaching of protection order which is granted under Section 18 of the Act. Section 31 cannot be invoked for any other violation including not paying maintenance, compensation or any other such orders passed under the DVC Act. The direction by the learned Magistrate is bad in law and has to be set aside. He relied on the judgment of Kerala High Court in the case of Suneesh v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 635, wherein it was held that Section 31 can be invoked only for breaching of a protection order and not for any other reliefs granted under DVC Act.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/wife would submit that Section 31 of the Act was considered by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Surya Prakash v. Smt.Rachna, 2018 Cri.L.J 2545, and Karnataka High Court in the judgment of Vincent Shanthakumar v. Smt.Christina Geetha Rani, 2015 Cri.L.J 1874 and argued that the Court can invoke provisions under Section 31 of the Act for not paying maintenance. A purposive interpretation has to be given to the provisions of DVC Act and in view of the definition of domestic violence, the prosecution would be maintainable under Section 31 of the Act for not paying maintenance and compensation. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the petitions.
9. Under DVC Act, several reliefs can be granted. The kind of reliefs that can be granted are segregated and specifically mentioned under Sections 18 to 22 and also the power to grant interim and ex-parte orders under Section 23 of the Act.
10. Section 18 of the Act deals with protection orders when the Court is satisfied that domestic violence has taken place or likely to take place, protection order in favour of aggrieved person can be passed.
11. Under Section 19 of the Act, the Court if satisfied that the domestic violence has taken place, pass orders regarding the right to be given shelter/ reside
