The provisions of Section 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are independent and in addition to any other remedy available to the aggrieved under any legal proceeding before the civil Court, criminal Court, or family Court.

1. By this petition, the applicant has challenged legality & propriety of the judgment dated 17-4-2008 passed by the Sessions Judge, Kabirdham in Criminal Appeal No.5/2008 whereby learned Sessions Judge has partly modified the amount of monthly maintenance awarded to the non-applicants under the provisions of Section 20 (1) (d) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short `the Act') by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kawardha vide order dated 14-12-2007 in Misc. Criminal Case No.76/2007.

2. The part of the judgment is challenged on the ground that while awarding any maintenance in accordance with Section 20 (1) (d) of the Act, the Court is required to award maintenance in accordance with Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short `the Code'), but the trial Court has not awarded maintenance in accordance with Section 125 of the Code and thereby committed illegality.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the trial Court as also the appellate Court.

4. Short question raised by the applicant is that at the time of awarding any monetary relief in terms of Section 20 (1) (d) of the Act, whether the Court is required to take into consideration the liability and entitlement for maintenance in terms of Section 125 of the Code?

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Section 20 (1) of the Act envisages that while disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12, the Magistrate is competent to direct the respondent to pay monetary relief to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person as a result of the domestic violence including the maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children, if any, including an order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under section 125 of the Code. Learned counsel further submits that in accordance with the provisions of Section 125 of the Code, the aggrieved party is required to prove that he or she is unable to maintain himself/herself and having sufficient cause for separate living and the person against whom maintenance is claimed is having sufficient means, but he is not maintaining the aggrieved person. Therefore, at the time of disposing the application under Section 12 (1) of the Act if the Court directs for payment of any expenses including maintenance, then the Court is required to examine the entitlement and liability in accordance with Section 125 of the Code.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the non- applicants supported the judgment impugned and submitted that the provisions for maintenance under Section 20 of the Act are in addition to an order of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code therefore, at the time of passing any order of maintenance under Section 20 of the Act, the Court is not required to examine the case in accordance with the provisions of Section 125 of the Code. The provisions are independent and in addition to the provisions of maintenance under the Code. Learned counsel further submit that Section 20 of the Act is a special provision for maintenance to the persons aggrieved under the Act. This section empowers to order lump sum or monthly payments for maintenance. Sub- section (6) of Section 20 of the Act empowers to direct the employer or a debtor of the non-applicant, to directly pay to the aggrieved person or to deposit with the court a portion of the wages or salaries or debt due to or accrued to the credit of the respondent. Relief available under Section 20 of the Act is additional relief available to the aggrieved person and in accordance with Section 26 of the Act the aggrieved person may also avail the remedy before a civil court, family court or a criminal court in addition to and along with any other reliefs available under the Act.

7. In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, I have examined the provisions relating to monetary relief provided under Section 20 of the Act. S