Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA, AGARTALA
S. G. CHATTOPADHYAY, J.
Sri Dipak Biswas, Son of Sri Dulal Biswas – Petitioner
Versus
Smt. Aditi Kar (Biswas), Wife of Sri Dipak Biswas – Respondent
Crl. Rev. P No.27 of 2018
Decided On : 23-04-2021
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 125 - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 498A - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 18, 19 and 12 – Offence of Harassment of women – Protection order – Return of stridhan - Respondent-wife of petitioner filed an application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act in a Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Judicial District alleging, inter alia, that her marriage with petitioner was solemnized and at time of marriage her parents gave a sum in cash to her husband and other valuables including various items of jewellery, furniture, bed-bedding etc - Few months after marriage, her petitioner husband started demanding more cash from her parents for buying a car and respondent was subjected to torture by him for fulfillment of his demand - On she was beaten up by her husband - She informed her father to came and rescue her.
Finding of the Court:
Respondent wife gave consistent evidence at trial Court in support of her allegation that she was persistently abused by her husband which included physical abuse as well as emotional abuse -Her father, PW-2 who was an Assistant Headmaster in a Government School also supported statement of his daughter - There was no inmate of her matrimonial home besides her - Her husband or anybody else was not found there to console lady - She wanted to return to her parents - Correctness of direction of Courts below to return stridhan to possession of respondent wife, it can be safely held that Courts below rightly directed petitioner to return stridhan including jewellery items to his respondent wife - Court find no reason to interfere with said direction of Courts below.
Result: Petition is dismissed
JUDGMENT :
1. Petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 02.05.2018 delivered in Criminal Appeal No. 29(2) of 2017 by the Sessions Judge, Gomati Judicial District, Udaipur affirming the judgment dated 05.06.2017 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Udaipur, Gomati Judicial District in case No.CR(DV) 24 of 2016 whereby the learned trial Court passed a protection order in favour of the respondent wife of the petitioner under Section 18 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act, for short) prohibiting the petitioner from committing any act of domestic violence on his respondent wife and directing him to return her stridhan in terms of Sub Section (8) of Section 19 of the DV Act.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
Respondent-wife of the petitioner filed an application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act in a Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gomati Judicial District at Udaipur on 30.05.2016 alleging, inter alia, that her marriage with the petitioner was solemnized on 23.07.2014 and at the time of marriage her parents gave a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in cash to her husband and other valuables including various items of jewellery, furniture, bed-bedding etc. Few months after marriage, her petitioner husband started demanding more cash from her parents for buying a car and respondent was subjected to torture by him for fulfillment of his demand. On 29.01.2016 she was beaten up by her husband. She informed her father to came and rescue her. Thereafter she filed a complaint under Section 498A IPC against her petitioner husband and also claimed maintenance allowance from him by filling a separate petition under Section 125 Cr. P.C. It was alleged by the respondent wife that her husband forcefully retained her stridhan including her jewellery. She therefore, claimed in a petition for return of her stridhan and a direction to her husband prohibiting him from committing any act of domestic violence on her. The respondent wife in her said petition furnished a list of her stridhan allegedly retained by her husband which is as under:
“SCHEDULE OF PROPERTIES/STRIDHAN”
Sl. No. Articles Quantity
01. Cash – Rs.5,00,000/-.
02. Raj Khat. 01 No.
03. Steel Almirah. 01 No.
04. Golden finger ring. 01 No.
05. Golden chain. 01 No.
06. Golden Bala. 02 Nos.
07. Golden ear ring. 02 Nos.
08. Golden Necklace. 01 No.
09. Bed, pillows, Bed sheet, Mosquito net etc. ----
10. Sharee. 20 Nos.
11. Pital Picher. 01 No.
12. Thala. 02 Nos.(Kash)
13. Glass. 02 Nos.(Kash)
14. Bati. 02 Nos.(Kash)
15. All Official Certificates.
16. All of the Educational Documents from Madhyamik to M.A.
17. Many other valuable items.
3. The Chief Judicial Magistrate received the complaint and made over the case to the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Court No.2) at Udaipur. Having received summons petitioner husband and his father Dulal Biswas appeared in Court and a written statement was submitted by the father of the petitioner in which he stated that no cash was paid by the parents of the respondent wife during marriage. It was admitted that some ornaments were given to her by her parents during her marriage which were taken away by her while she left her matrimonial home on 29.01.2016. It was stated in the written statement of the father of the petitioner husband that the respondent wife was suffering from mental disorder for which she received treatment from various mental clinics at Agartala and Manipur and also at NIMHANS in Bangalore. The trial Court also called for a domestic incident report from the concerned Protection Officer and such report was submitted in Court on 20.10.2016.
4. During trial of the case, respondent wife examined herself as PW-1. Her father, Sri Milan Chandra Kar as PW-2, a goldsmith namely, Sri Arun Kumar Bhowmik as PW-3 and Smti Sikha Deb, Sub-Inspector of Police of R. K. Pur Women Police Station as PW-4. All these four witnesses were cross examined on behalf of the p
Point of law: Dowry harassment – Return of stridhan – Properties claimed by the respondent wife being her wedding gifts were stridhan and she was the absolute owner of the said property and the husba....
The court emphasized the necessity for financial disclosure in domestic violence cases to ensure fair maintenance assessments, mandating adherence to established principles from prior apex court ruli....
The DV Act applies to foreign citizens for acts of domestic violence occurring in India, and a domestic relationship exists if parties lived together at any time, regardless of subsequent divorce.
Domestic violence - First appellate court has passed an order of restitution of conjugal rights which has impermissible having regard to the scope of the appeal under the DV Act
The court affirmed that domestic violence encompasses various forms of abuse, and maintenance should be awarded from the date of the application under the DV Act, not the date of the order.
The court considered the financial capabilities, earning capacity of the first petitioner, and the way of life in modifying the maintenance amount and directing the petitioners to hand over 51.25 sov....
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
