Hasin Jahan vs State of West Bengal - 2025 Supreme(Cal) 507

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2025 Supreme(Cal) 507

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE, J.
Hasin Jahan - Appellant
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr. - Respondent
CRR 656 of 2023, IA No.CRAN 1 of 2023
Decided On : 01-07-2025

Important Points

The court must evaluate maintenance claims based on financial capacity and standard of living, rather than equalization of wealth post-separation.

Subject

Domestic Violence - Interim Relief

Act Referred

PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT : S.12, S.20, S.20(2), S.23, S.29
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.307, S.325, S.328, S.34, S.376, S.498(a)
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.39
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE : S.125

Headnote

This case examines a petition for interim monetary relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 following allegations of domestic violence. The trial court originally granted minimal relief, leading to an appeal by the petitioner for increased amounts based on the welfare of her and her child. The appellate court found that the trial court had not adequately considered the financial capabilities of the opposite party and established an appropriate standard of living for the petitioner and her child, leading to a revised ruling of relief accordingly.

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed, Ms. Ghazala Firdaus, Mr. Sk. Saidullah, Mr. Mithun Mondal, Mr. Md. Arsalan
For the Respondent: Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Mr. Sompriya Chowdhury, Mr. B. Kumar, Mr. I. Basu

Table of Content
1. petition for interim monetary relief under domestic violence act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court's ruling and factual background assessment. (Para 4 , 5 , 9)
3. arguments against the adequacy of granted relief. (Para 6 , 8 , 10)
4. court's determination on standard of living and financial capacity. (Para 19 , 20 , 22)
5. revised interim relief amounts determined by the court. (Para 24 , 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT :

AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE, J.

1. This application has arisen against judgment and order dated 18th January, 2023 passed by learned ADJ, FTC Court, Alipore in Criminal Appeal no. 203 of 2018, by which court below disposed of petitioner’s prayer for interim monetary relief.

2. Before going further, let me reproduce the background of the present case. The petitioner herein got married to the opposite party no.2 on 7th April, 2014, following the Islamic Rituals and customs and after the said marriage the couple was blessed with a female child, who was born on 17.07.2015. Incidentally petitioner further disclosed that this was her second marriage and from the previous marriage the petitioner had two daughters, who are also staying with the mother/petitioner.

3. The allegation levelled by the petitioner herein against her husband/opposite party no.2 in her application under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violation Act, 2005.(in short PWDV Act) is that after marriage the petitioner and her minor daughter were subjected to enormous physical as well as mental torture at the instance of the opposite party no.2 and his family members and for which under very compelling circumstances, the petitioner had to lodge a written complaint which was treated as an FIR and Jadavpur P.S. Case no. 82 of 2018 dated 8th March, 2018 under section 498A/328/307/376/325/34 of the Indian Penal code was registered for investigation, against the opposite party no.2 herein and his other family members. Her further contention is that being aggrieved by the continuous mental and physical torture, indifference, neglect meted out upon the petitioner and her minor daughter, she was constrained to file the instant application under section 12 of the PWDV Act interalia praying for monetary relief including an interim monetary relief to the tune of Rs. 7 (seven) lakhs per month for herself and monetary relief to the tune of Rs. 3 (three) lakhs for her minor daughter from the opposite party no.2.

4. After receiving notice, the opposite party no.2 entered appearance and filed written objection before the Magistrate, who while disposing such application filed by the petitioner under section 23 of the PWDV Act, rejected the prayer for interim monetary relief qua the petitioner herein and only directed her minor daughter to pay a sum of Rs. 80,000/- per month towards interim monetary relief.

5. Being aggrieved by such order the petitioner herein preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions judge, Alipore under section 29 of PWDV Act, being Criminal Appeal no.203 of 2018. The petitioner and the opposite party no.2 filed their affidavit of assets and liabilities before the court below and by the impugned judgment and order dated 18th January, 2023 the court below disposed of the said Criminal Appeal modifying the order dated 16.08.2018 passed by learned Magistrate and thereby directed the opposite party no.2 herein to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month to the petitioner/wife and further directed the opposite party no.2/daughter to pay a sum of Rs. 80,000/- towards interim monetary relief from the date of filing the interim application.

6. Being aggrieved by the said impugned judgment dated 18.01.2023, Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that while passing the impugned order, the learned Court below put unnecessary reliance upon the written objection filed by the opposite party no.2 and treated the same as gospel truth, while granting meagre interim monetary relief to the petitioner and her minor daughter. The