Emotional violence and dowry demands constitute domestic violence, affirming the petitioner as an aggrieved person under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

ORDER :

1. The revision petitioner in both these petitions, is the petitioner in M.C.No.53/2011 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam. The petitioner had filed the above M.C before the Chief Judicial Magistrate seeking various reliefs under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The respondent in Crl.R.P.No.836/2019 was the husband of the petitioner. The respondents in Crl.R.P.No.1080/2023 are the sister and sister’s husband of the respondent in Crl.R.P.No.836/2019. As per order dated 05.08.2017 in M.C.No.53/2011, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate granted reliefs inclusive of a protection order, order to return 125 sovereigns of gold, order to return a Maruti Swift car and also to return an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the petitioner. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate also directed the first respondent to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner and to pay maintenance @ Rs.3,000/- per month to the daughter of the petitioner. The first respondent in the above said M.C, who was the husband of the petitioner, challenged the above order by filing Crl.A.No.142/2017 before the Sessions Court, Kollam. Respondent Nos.2 and 3, who are the sister and sister’s husband of the first respondent, also challenged the above order by filing Crl.A.No.144/2017 before the Sessions Court, Kollam. As per the common judgment dated 08.02.2019 rendered by the Additional Sessions Court-V, Kollam, the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate granting reliefs to the petitioner was set aside. These revision petitions are directed against the aforesaid common judgment rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge-V, Kollam in Crl.A.Nos.142/2017 and 144/2017.

2. The case of the petitioner is summarised as follows: The petitioner married the first respondent on 11.08.2009. As per the demand of the respondents, 125 sovereigns of gold and a Maruti Swift car were given as dowry in connection with the aforesaid marriage. In addition to that, an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was also handed over to the respondents towards meeting the marriage expenses. The aforesaid Maruti Swift car was purchased by the father of the petitioner in the name of the sister-in-law of the petitioner by making use of a loan availed in the name of the petitioner’s sister-in-law. When the respondent came to know that the said vehicle was in the name of the petitioner’s sister-in-law, they started ill-treating the petitioner demanding that the vehicle has to be immediately transferred to the name of the first respondent. On 25.10.2009, the petitioner was expelled from the house of the respondents with the direction to bring an agreement from her sister-in-law undertaking to transfer the ownership of the said vehicle in favour of the first respondent. Accordingly, on 29.10.2009, such an agreement was prepared by the father and sister-in-law of the petitioner and the petitioner was taken back to the respondents’ house. The petitioner, thereafter, came to her family house on 11.04.2010 for the delivery of her child. Thereafter, the first respondent neglected to take care of the petitioner and the new born child. In the meanwhile, the 4th respondent in the M.C, who was the father of the first respondent, demanded another sum of Rs.5,00,000 as dowry, and declared that the petitioner will not be permitted to enter into their house unless the above demand of payment of Rs.5 lakhs is met by the petitioner and her parents. The respondents continued to retain the possession of the aforesaid 125 sovereigns of gold which belonged to the petitioner. So also, the first respondent continued to use the Maruti swift car which was given by the petitioner’s father at the time of the marriage of the petitioner with the first respondent. It is under the above circumstances that the petitioner approached the learned Magistrate seeking various reliefs under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

3. In the objection