Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J.
Ajay Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Uma - Respondent
CRL.M.C. No. 2677 of 2021 and CRL.M.A. No. 17165 of 2021
Decided On : 05-01-2024
DV Act - Quashing of Complaint Case - Section 23 of DV Act - [DV Act] - [Quashing of Complaint Case] - [Section 12, Section 23]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash a complaint case and interim maintenance order under Section 23 of the DV Act. The petitioner alleged domestic violence and illicit relationships by the respondent, while the respondent accused the petitioner of false criminal cases and economic abuse. The petitioner also challenged the non-consideration of DIR and the order on maintenance.
Finding of the Court:
The court found prima facie evidence of domestic violence and economic abuse by the petitioner, and upheld the order on maintenance. The court dismissed the petition and pending application.
Issues: Allegations of domestic violence, illicit relationships, non-consideration of DIR, and maintenance were contested.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that prima facie evidence of domestic violence and economic abuse existed, and the order on maintenance was justified. The non-consideration of DIR was found to be without merit.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded. Pending application was also disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J. - Petition has been preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner for quashing of Complaint Case No.1852/2021 and proceedings emanating therefrom, as well as quashing/modification of order dated 15.09.2021 passed by learned MM, Tis Hazari Courts whereby in an application for interim maintenance under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'DV Act'), the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 6000/- per month to the complainant/respondent towards rent alongwith interim maintenance of Rs. 11,460/- per month to the complainant and a sum of Rs. 9,800/- towards the expenditure of both minor daughters in terms of paragraphs 14 and 15 as under:
"14. Hence, it is ordered that respondent shall pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- per month to the complainant towards rent, which is the rent to be paid for alternative accommodation, as arranged by the complainant, as per rent agreement annexed. The amount of rent @ Rs. 6,000/- per shall be payable from the date of execution of new rent agreement i.e. 23.08.2021 till the disposal of petition under section 12 D.V. Act. The earlier rent as paid towards previous rent agreement is however not subject to adjustment.
15. The respondent no. 1 is further directed to pay Rs. 9,800/- to the complainant towards the expenditure of both minor daughters and Rs. 11,460/- per month to the complainant towards her interim maintenance. The said amount shall be payable from the date of filing of the petition till the disposal of the present petition or till they are legally entitled to receive the same, whichever is earlier. The respondent is directed to pay the said amount by the 7th of each calender month. The respondent is directed to clear the arrears of said maintenance within 06 months."
2. As per the case of the petitioner, the marriage between the parties was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 31.05.2010 at Delhi. On 04.05.2011 and 05.03.2014, the couple was blessed with daughters. A loan had to be taken up by the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- from bank on 03.11.2018 for the purpose of treatment of the respondent/complainant since she had developed some medical complications. Another loan was further obtained for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-on 10.06.2019 and the petitioner has been paying Equal Monthly Instalments ('EMIs', for short) for the same. In December, 2020, petitioner who is working as a Head Constable in Delhi Police developed some doubt over activities of the respondent/complainant and it was found that she had illicit relationship with his elder brother, Vinay Kumar, for four years as well as with one Rahul and Anuj. He also alleged that the respondent had planned a hoax case of theft at home of her jewellery which she had handed over to Vinay Kumar during their illicit relationship. An FIR No.301/2018 regarding theft was lodged at P.S. Khajoori Khas,
3. It is further the case of the petitioner that his cousin namely, Priya, confessed to him in July, 2021 that the respondent on 09.09.2020 on a false pretext took her to Hotel Signature, Gali No.6, Gopalpur Road, Delhi where two men, namely, Rahul and Anuj were already present. The respondent/complainant on the basis of Aadhar Card of Priya got entry in the Hotel and after taking some money from Rahul, asked Priya to go alongwith Rahul. On entering the room she was sexually molested by Rahul but managed to escape. Priya was further threatened by the respondent/complainant that in case she disclosed about the incident, she would be defamed. A similar incident is stated to have been repeated on 11.12.2020 by the respondent.
4. In the aforesaid background, the petitioner is claimed to have left his residential premises and sold the property. Further, a flat was rented out in Dwarka, nearby the place of working of the respondent. Petitioner also took a property on rent at Dayalpur, Del
Prima facie evidence of domestic violence and economic abuse justified the order on maintenance under the DV Act.
Point of law: Provision of the Section 29 of the Act, appeal lies against any order passed by the trial court but without preferring the appeal, the petitioner has sought for quashing of the order af....
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.
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....
The jurisdiction in domestic violence cases should prioritize the victim's temporary residence as per the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, ensuring timely and effective relief.
Interim maintenance under the PWDV Act cannot be denied based solely on unproven allegations of adultery; status as an aggrieved person remains intact at the interim stage.
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
