Wife entitled to maintenance under DV Act where marriage admitted, despite unproven prior marriage claims, until annulled by competent court; domestic violence proved warrants monetary and residence relief.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Instant petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, lays challenge to judgment dated 1.8.2024, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, in CIS Registration No. 67/2023, titled Pooja Devi v. Jatinpreet Singh and Ors., whereby appeal having been filed by respondent No.1 under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in short the “Act”), laying therein challenge to order dated 21.3.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-2, Una District Una, Himachal Pradesh in CrMA No. 2315 of 2023 (Pooja Devi v. Jatinpreet Singh and Ors), came to be allowed.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record by the respective parties are that respondent No.1 claiming himself to be legally wedded wife of petitioner herein filed complaint under Section 12 of the Act in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-2, Una, alleging therein that in the month of January 2019, she and petitioner came in contact with each other through Instagram, whereafter they became friends and later on, petitioner proposed her for marriage. She alleged that Roka Ceremony was held on 24.7.2020 at her parental house. She alleged that their marriage was solemnized according to Sikh Rites and ceremonies in Gurudwara at Village Rora, Tehsil haroli, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, but no child was born out of their wedlock. She alleged that her parents have spent approximately Rs.8.00 lakh on her marriage and after one month of marriage, petitioner went to his place of posting at Jhansi leaving her behind with respondents No. 2 to 4, i.e. mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-law. She alleged that petitioner did not pay even single penny for her maintenance and her status was just like a servant in the house. She alleged that respondents No. 2 to 4 started harassing her for dowry and also gave her beatings. She alleged that in the month of May 2022, petitioner came on leave, but his attitude and conduct was totally changed. He alleged that petitioner also started making illegal demands and on her refusal, she was mercilessly beaten up by him. She alleged that she called her parents telephonically, who visited her matrimonial house next day and inquired about the beatings given to her by the respondents. She alleged that they apologized and undertook that such incident would not happen in future, however, in September 2022, respondents No. 2 to 4 again started harassing/ humiliating her and abusing her parents and started demanding dowry in the absence of the petitioner. She alleged that on 25.9.2022, her mother-in-law took her jewellary and when she telephonically called the petitioner, he also abused and threatened her. She alleged that since petitioner did not pay single penny to her after the marriage, it is difficult for her to survive. She alleged that she has no source of income, whereas petitioner is serving in Indian Army and getting about Rs.72,000/- per month as salary. She alleged that respondents have ousted her from her matrimonial house and no accommodation has been provided to her, hence appropriate orders with regard to maintenance as well as accommodation be passed.

3. Learned trial Court rejected the complaint vide order dated 21.3.2023 on the pretext that respondent No.1 solemnized marriage with petitioner during subsistence of her earlier marriage with one Pradeep Kumar.

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid order dated 21.3.2023, passed by the learned trial Court, resp