For relief under the PWDVA, the complainant must substantiate claims of domestic violence with evidence, not merely rely on cross-examination denials.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.

1. The present revision petition under Sections 397/401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") has been filed by the petitioner challenging judgment dated 19.02.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-Special Fast Track Court, Saket Courts, New Delhi ("Appellate Court") in appeal C.A. No. 253/17 filed under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ("PWDVA") against judgment and order dated 13.04.2017 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-01, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi("Trial Court") in Complaint Case No. 337/1/09.

2. The case of the petitioner is that in an application filed under Section 12 of PWDVA, 2005 by the petitioner, after the completion of pleadings, an interim order was passed by the learned Trial Court on 25.11.2009 vide which, the appellant was allowed to stay in her matrimonial home along with children. Thereafter, vide order dated 28.07.2010, the said court had further directed the respondent to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the petitioner per month. Thereafter, a settlement was arrived at in medication centre, however, the respondent did not comply with the same and stopped residing with her. The petitioner had deposited a Bank Guarantee in sum of Rs.60,000/- in terms of orders of the High Court of Delhi. The petitioner was directed to lead her evidence by the learned Trial Court, and vide order dated 06.04.2015 passed by this Court, it was directed that the learned Trial Court shall make every endeavour to decide the maintenance application within four weeks of filing of income affidavit of respondent no. 1. Respondent no. 1 had filed the same, thereafter, the petitioner was granted two opportunities to conclude complainant's evidence. However, since she did not lead evidence, her evidence was closed vide order dated 15.07.2015 and the application to set aside the said order was also dismissed vide order dated 22.08.2015. Petitioner had filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for being granted opportunity to lead evidence. However, the same also dismissed by the learned Trial Court on 17.12.2016. Thereafter, the respondent had led his evidence and was cross-examined.Both the parties had advanced arguments and thereafter, the order dated 13.04.2017 was passed. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

"...13. It is submitted by the aggrieved person that she got legally married to respondent no. 1 and thereafter she lived with the respondent no. 1. It is further submitted that both the parties had two children out of the marriage. Thus, it is established that domestic relationship was shared between the parties and that they lived in a shared household.

14. In order to claim any relief under the Act, it has to be seen whether any domestic violence was suffered at all by the aggrieved or not. In the present case, aggrieved has not proved any of the allegations made by her as she has failed to lead any evidence. Despite giving various opportunities to her aggrieved failed to lead her evidence. Respondent filed his evidence by way of an affidavit and he was cross examined at length. However, all allegations of domestic violence were denied by him and aggrieved could not prove that she suffered domestic violence at the hands of respondent no. 1 or any of the other respondents. Thus, it has not been proved that domestic violence was inflicted upon the aggr