Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Arvind Kumar Tripathi (II), J.
Mohd. Waqar & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Another - Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 161 of 2014
Decided On : 06-05-2014
Domestic Violence - Protection of Women - Act 2005, Act 1986 - Sections 2(a), 2(f), 3, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20 - The court discussed the applicability of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 in a case involving allegations of domestic violence and divorce. The court highlighted key legal provisions, their interpretations, and their influence on the court's decision.
Fact of the Case:
A complaint was filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 by a woman claiming to be the wife of the respondent, alleging domestic violence and seeking maintenance and compensation. The respondent contended that the Act did not apply to a divorced Muslim woman and that the divorce had already been given. The lower courts partially allowed the application and dismissed the appeal, prompting the filing of a criminal revision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the lower courts did not consider the evidence and law properly, and remanded the case for fresh consideration. It highlighted discrepancies in the financial status of the complainant and the applicability of the Acts to divorced Muslim women.
Issues: The issues involved the applicability of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 to a case involving allegations of domestic violence and divorce, and the proper consideration of evidence and law by the lower courts.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for proper consideration of evidence and law, highlighted discrepancies in the complainant's financial status, and discussed the applicability of the Acts to divorced Muslim women.
Final Decision: The criminal revision was allowed, and the impugned orders were quashed. The matter was remanded back to the trial court for fresh consideration.
Key Points: - The judgment analyzes the applicability of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 to divorced Muslim women and its interplay with the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. (!) (!) (!) - It discusses the scope of Section 3 of Act 1986 regarding reasonable and fair provision, maintenance, mahr, and delivery of properties at the time of divorce, and its relationship to post-iddat maintenance. (!) (!) (!) (!) - (!) - It emphasizes that the Act 2005 is protective and remedial for aggrieved persons in domestic violence, and that its provisions are in addition to existing laws, not in derogation. (!) (!) (!) - It highlights that a divorced woman’s entitlement under Muslim law to protection or maintenance must be assessed with consideration of evidence, financial status, and the relevant statutory provisions, including Section 12 of Act 2005. (!) (!) (!) - (!) - The court remands the matter for fresh consideration, noting improper consideration of evidence and legal provisions by lower courts, and clarifies the need to determine whether there was domestic violence and the correct application of protections. (!) (!) (!)
Arvind Kumar Tripathi (II), J.
Heard Shri Khaleeq Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the revisionists, Shri Sharad Dixit, learned AGA for the State respondent and Dr. L.P. Misra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
2. This criminal revision has been filed by Mohd. Waqar and others challenging the order dated 5.3.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Faizabad in Criminal Appeal No.2 of 2014 by which the appeal filed by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 7.12.2013 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate - I, Court No.10, Faizabad was dismissed.
3. By the order dated 7.12.2013 the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate - I, Court No.10, Faizabad has partly allowed the application of Smt. Amna Muzaffar moved under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in Complaint Case No.977 of 2013.
4. As per factual matrix of the case, a complaint under Section 12 of the Act was filed by Amna Muzaffar, claiming herself to be the wife of Mohd. Waqar, against Mohd. Waqar, Mahboob, Smt. Shakila, Sahar Sayyed and Rehana alleging that she was married with Mohd. Waqar on 8.6.2004, as per Muslim Law. She went to her matrimonial house same day, and was living as wife. Mohd. Waqar was working at Sharjah before marriage, so she also went to Sharjah. Mohd. Waqar was getting inadequate salary, so she herself started working as teacher, and saved much amount. Later on, salary of Mohd. Waqar was also increased, then she left the job and became involved in family life. In the month of August, 2011, she came to India along with her husband Mohd. Waqar and started living in her matrimonal house where opposite parties started demanding Rs.Twenty Lacs cash and a scorpio. She refused to fulfill the demand, then she was being tortured physically, mentally, emotionally and economically. On 18.11.2011, she was beaten by kicks and fists, and they tried to evict her from the house, but in order to save her future, she tried to make harmony. On 1.2.2012, she was made to sign on blank papers on the point of pistol, and her jewellery and clothes were usurped by the opposite parties, and later on, she was kicked out from the house on 21.2.2012. Then, she went to her maika. Later on, she learnt that Mohd. Waqar had gone to Sharjah. She also went to Sharjah, but Mohd. Waqar was not found there, then she returned back on 27.2.2012, and went to her matrimonial house, but she was not permitted to enter in the house, hence she went to her maika. It was submitted that Mohd. Waqar is MBA degree holder, and now, he is earning Rs.50,000/- per month from his employment in metro city Mumbai. By filing this complaint, she claimed Rs.20,000/- per month for fooding and medical treatment. Rs.10,000/- per month for maintenance, and Rs.Five Lacs as compensation. Opposite party nos.1 and 2 (revisionist nos.1 and 2) appeared before the Court and filed objection admitting the marriage and it was averred that family members of Amna Muzaffar were presurising them to fix Rs.Fifty One Lacs as mahr, then they said that they are not in a capacity to pay such heavy amount. Then Amna Muzaffar said that after marriage she will forgive this mahr. It was submitted that in Sharjah the husband used to give his entire salary to Amna Muzaffar, but she always got it transferred in her account in Syndicate Bank, Faizabad, and used to purchase jewellery. She has purchased 1.5 kilograms gold including jewellery, and has deposited Rs. Forty Lacs from the salary of Mohd. Waqar. When they were at Sharjah, Amna Muzaffar requested that her two brothers also be called there and get them employed some where, which was done by Mohd. Waqar, and after that, there was change in the behaviour of Amna Muzaffar, and she started treating him with cruelty and started demanding divorce. On 30.1.2012, Mohd. Waqar divorced Amna Muzaffar, as per Muslim Law, and he has sent the information to Amna M
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
