Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Subhendu Samanta, J.
Nandita Sarkar - Appellant
Versus
Tilak Sarkar & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 1857, 1858 of 2018
Decided On : 21-12-2022
PWDV Act - Domestic Violence - Section 12, 18, 20, 22, 23 - The court set aside the judgment of the Magistrate for monetary relief towards the petitioner. The widowed daughter-in-law filed an application under the PWDV Act against the opposite parties for monetary relief, compensation, and return of streedhan articles. The court found that the application was not barred by limitation, the daughter-in-law was entitled to maintenance from her father-in-law, and the opposite parties failed to prove that no domestic violence had occurred. The court held that the widowed daughter-in-law was entitled to maintenance and other relief from her father-in-law according to the provisions of the PWDV Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a widowed daughter-in-law, filed an application under the PWDV Act against the opposite parties for monetary relief, compensation, and return of streedhan articles. The Magistrate awarded monetary relief and compensation in favor of the petitioner, but the Appellate Court set aside the judgment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the application was not barred by limitation, the daughter-in-law was entitled to maintenance from her father-in-law, and the opposite parties failed to prove that no domestic violence had occurred.
Issues: The issues included the timeliness of the application, entitlement to maintenance from the father-in-law, and the proof of domestic violence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there is no limitation to file an application under the PWDV Act, and the daughter-in-law is entitled to maintenance from her father-in-law. The court also found that the opposite parties failed to prove that no domestic violence had occurred.
Final Decision: The court set aside the judgment of the Appellate Court and affirmed the order passed by the Magistrate, allowing the petitioner's application for monetary relief and compensation.
JUDGMENT
Subhendu Samanta, J. - This is an application U/s 482 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, preferred against a Judgment and Order dated 07.04.2018 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, First Track 1st Court Howrah, in criminal appeal no. 111 of 2015 and 116 of 2015 thereby setting aside the judgment and order of awarding monitory relief including compensation and other reliefs to the petitioner by the order dated 31.07.2015 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate 4th Court Howrah, in Misc case No. 269 of 2012 U/s 12 read with Section 18,20,22,23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005(PWDV Act).
2. The present petitioner is the widowed daughter-in-law of present opposite party Nos. 1 and 2. The petitioner filed an application U/s 12 read with Section- 18,20,22,23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005(PWDV Act) against the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 before the Learned Jurisdictional Magistrate. The Magistrate awarded monitory relief including compensation in favour of the petitioner.
3. Opposite parties preferred an appeal before the Learned Sessions Judge for setting aside the award; the petitioner also preferred another appeal before the Sessions Judge, against the same order for inadequate monitory relief.
4. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, First Track 1st Court Howrah, heard both the appeals and passed a common judgment thereby set aside the judgment of the Magistrate for monitory relief towards the petitioner. Thereby, appeal preferred by opposite party was allowed and the appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected. Hence, both this criminal revisional applications were preferred by the petitioner against the order of the Ld. Additional Judge, First Track 1st Court, Howrah.
5. Both the appeals were disposed of by separate Judgments; however this court disposing of the both instant criminal revisional applications by this common Judgment.
6. It is the case of the petitioner that marriage between this petitioner with Saugata Sarkar, since deceased, the son opposite Nos. 1 and 2, was solemnised on 10.05.2009 according to Special Marriage Act 1954. After the said marriage the petitioner started to reside at the house of opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 along with her husband and in-laws. After the marriage all the ornaments and other valuable articles which were gifted by the parents and parental relations of the petitioner as well as the other gifted items were kept at the in-laws house of the petitioner under the custody of the opposite parties. He further argued that a domestic relationship had cropped up between petitioner and O.P. No. 1 and 2, during her stay at her matrimonial home.
7. It is the case of the petitioner that after few days of marriage the petitioner found that her husband was not physically fit and was addicted to alcohol with other bad habits. The petitioner tried to her level best to restrain her husband from taking alcohol but the same was in vain. Finally the husband of the petitioner expired on 29.10.2010.
8. It is the further case of the petitioner that the opposite parties no. 1 and 2 along with other in-laws blamed the petitioner for the death of her husband and ultimately on the next day of death of her husband, the petitioner was forced to live her matrimonial home keeping all valuable articles and ornaments with the custody of the opposite parties.
9. It is the further case of the petitioner that the parents of the petitioner were forced to sign on some receipt and blank papers on the same day when she was forced to live her matrimonial home. It is the further case of the petitioner that all her streedhan articles including household goods ornaments e.t.c. were in the custody of the opposite parties and they did not return the same to the petitioner instead of demand. Since then the petitioner had no other option but to stay with her father at Shrinath Bose Lane, Howrah. It is the further case the petitioner that t
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a widowed daughter-in-law is entitled to maintenance and other relief from her father-in-law according to the provisions of the PWDV Act.
Allegations of domestic violence must be proven for entitlement to reliefs under the DV Act, and the court may consider the respondent's financial resources in determining maintenance allowance.
Domestic violence legislation mandates adequate monetary relief for the aggrieved spouse, with courts retaining jurisdiction to modify relief only under exceptional circumstances, substantiated by ev....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 23 of the Act No. 43 of 2005, which empowers the Magistrate to grant interim monetary relief to aggri....
Quantum of maintenance must be decent and adequate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the aggrieved person has the right to seek relief under the Domestic Violence Act at any stage, even if living separately from the respondent.
A wife must demonstrate sufficient reason to refuse cohabitation with her husband to be entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.
A divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., regardless of her marital status, emphasizing the husband's obligation to provide for his wife and children.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
