SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2526

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
Abizar N. Rangawals & Another - Petitioners
Versus
Sakina & Others - Respondents
Crl.R.C.No.1097 of 2017 & Crl.R.C.No.526 of 2015 & C.M.P.No.1436 of 2018
Decided On : 24-11-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mrs. Geeta Ramaseshan, K. Sudalia Kannan.
For the Respondents: Mr. V. Prakash, Senior Counsel for Mr. V. Manohar, Dr. Krishanmurthy, Mr. S. Vinoth Kumar, Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side).

Headnote:

Criminal Procedural Code, 1973 - Section 482, 397 r/w. 401– Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 341, 323, 324, 498-A and 506(ii) read with Section 34 – Wrongful confinement - Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt – Husband or relative of husband of a women subjecting her to cruelty - Marriage between revision petitioner in Crl.R.C. and respondent therein was solemnized - Out of their lawful wed-lock, two female children were born to them - Difference of opinion arose between them and they are living separately – Held, On point of compensation for domestic violence, court find that it is a higher side - Taking into consideration act of violence found to have been committed by husband and in-laws, find that same may be reduced to Rs.7.5 lakhs to be payable within a period of two months - In all other respects, order of maintenance and order of educational expenses as ordered by trial Court, is hereby confirmed - Balance of amount, has to be paid within a period of 3 months on equal installments, failing which, respondent/wife is entitled to move for appropriate orders before Magistrate Court - Court on a consideration of evidence, has come to conclusion that evidence adduced by prosecution is to infirm to hold commission of Section 498-A I.P.C and also Section 341I.P.C and accordingly, acquitted accused and convicted accused for the offence under Section 323 sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- i.e., maximum fine that can be granted and hence, court find that Crl.R.C - Filed by wife to enhance punishment order passed in C.C., does not call for any interference in absence of any perversity in finding or irregular or illegality in proceedings of Magistrate and in absence of any perversity, court find that order passed by Magistrate in CC. does not call for interference and accordingly, this Criminal Revision petition is hereby dismissed - Criminal Revision petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer in Crl.R.C.No.1097 of 2017: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the order passed in C.A.No.52 of 2013 and 223 of 2013 dated 17.06.2017 by the V Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai against M.C.No.3 of 2011 dated 11.02.2013 by the learned VII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.

Prayer in Crl.R.C.No.526 of 2015: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C., to reverse the judgment rendered by VII Metropolitan Magistrate in C.C.No.1861 of 2012 pronounced on 12th December 2014 by finding the all the accused guilty of offences under Section 341, 498-A, 506/2 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.)

Crl.R.C.No.1097 of 2017 is filed by the husband against the order of learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.III in C.C.No.1861 of 2012 dated 12.10.2014 which is filed under Domestic Violence Act.

2. Crl.R.C.No.526 of 2015 is filed by the wife seeking enhancement of sentence awarded in C.C.No.1861 of 2012 dated 12.10.2014 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.

3. Mr. V. Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the wife and Mr. Dr. Krishnamurthy, learned counsel appearing for the husband.

4. Heard the learned Senior Advocate/Advocates appearing for the the respective parties.

Admitted factual matrix of the case:-

5. The marriage between the revision petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.1097 of 2017 and the first respondent therein was solemnized on 18.09.2015 at Dawoodi Bhora Jamat, Dr. Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin Shaeb Street (Moore street), Chennai - 01. Out of their lawful wed-lock, two female children, namely Hussaina Abizer and Munira Abizer were born to them. Difference of opinion arose between them and they are living separately.

6. “Talaaq” was pronounced as thrice required under their personal law, under letters dated 05.09.2011, 08.10.2011 and 11.11.2011 respectively. Such pronouncements were made by e-mails as well as by SMS through his mobile phone to the mobile phone of the wife.

7. The above marriage solemnized on 18.09.2005 at Dawoodi Bhora Jamat, Dr. Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin Shaeb Street (Moore Street), Chennai - 01 was hereby dissolved by a decree of divorce in O.S.No.73 of 2012, on the file of the II Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai.

Crl.R.C.No.1097 of 2017:-

8. The respondent/wife filed M.C.No.3/2011 before the VII Metropolitan Magistrate under Sections 12, 13, 19, 20 and 21 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, seeking the monthly maintenance for the minors and compensation for Domestic Violence committed upon her and also for the protection order under Section 18.

9. The wife examined herself as P.W.1 and marked as Exs.P1 to P7, while the husband side examined himself as R.W.1 and marked as Exs.R1 to R9.

10. After trial, the learned Magistrate has held that the husband had committed the Domestic Violence and dismissed the petition against the third respondent. While the husband and father-in-law were held to have committed an act of Domestic Violence and protection order was also passed prohibiting the husband and father-in-law from interfering with the custody of the children by the petitioner/wife and also prohibited from entering the school of minor Hussaina and also prohibited the husband and the father-in-law from causing any violence on the wife and relatives of the petitioner.

11. The Court below granted the following amounts in the respective heads.

Heads

Amount

Rent

Rs.15,000/-

School Fees

Rs.75,000/-

Medical Expenses

Rs.2,500/-

Food Cloths

Rs.15,000/-

Household Expenditure

Rs.5,000/-

Physical and Mental Injury

Rs.10,00,000/-

12. Aggrieved by the said order, both the parties have appeared to have filed appeal.

13. While the husband has filed Crl.A.No.52/2013, the wife has filed Crl.A.No.223 of 2013 before the V Additional Sessions Court,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top