Domestic violence legislation mandates adequate monetary relief for the aggrieved spouse, with courts retaining jurisdiction to modify relief only under exceptional circumstances, substantiated by evidence and financial context.

JUDGMENT

S.G. Chattopadhyay, J. - By means of filing this Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C., hereunder) read with Section 2 5 (2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, petitioner Ramendra Kishore Bhattacharjee has sought for modification of the judgment and order dated 10.02.2021 passed by this court in Criminal Revision Petition No. 36 of 2020 for reducing the amount of monetary relief granted to the petitioner from Rs. 15,000/- to a reasonable sum of money in view of the financial constraints of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

(i) For modification of the judgment and order dated 10.02.2021 passed by this court in Criminal Revision Petition No. 36 of 2020 by reducing the amount of monetary relief granted to the respondent wife.

(ii) For exempting the petitioner from paying the arrear of maintenance.

(iii) For passing such other order/orders as the court deems fit and proper.

3. Heard Mr. S. Kar Bhowmik, learned Sr. Advocate, appearing along with Mr. J. Das, learned advocate, for the petitioner.

Heard Mr. Raju Datta, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent wife.

4. The factual context of the case is as under:

The wife presented an application under Section 12 of the DV Act in the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First class (court No. 8) at Agartala on 22.01.2016 seeking various reliefs under the DV Act wherein she referred to several incidents of domestic violence against her husband. It was stated by her that after solemnization of their marriage a son was born to them on 28.05.2001. Their relationship was normal for a period of 01 year only. Thereafter, her husband subjected her to harassment and torture for dowry and since she was unable to meet his demand, she was physically assaulted by her husband on various dates. Gradually he developed an extramarital affair. When the wife raised protest against his conduct he assaulted her. As a result of continuous assault on 16.12.2015 and 17.12.2015 she became ill and received treatment in IGM Hospital at Agartala. Unable to bear his torture, the wife parted with his company on 17.12.2015. In this factual background, she claimed the following reliefs in the trial court under the DV Act:

(i) A protection order under Section 18 of the DV Act restraining her husband from committing acts of domestic violence to her.

(ii) Residence order under Section 19 of the DV Act restraining the husband from dispossessing her from the shared household.

(iii) Monetary relief under Section 20 of the DV Act @ Rs. 15,000/- per month along with one time medical expenses of Rs. 1 lakh.

(iv) Compensation order under Section 22 of the DV Act against the husband for payment of compensation and damages of an amount of Rs. 3 lakhs for the injuries including mental torture and emotional distress caused to her by her husband by his acts of domestic violence.

5. Her application was registered in the trial court as case No. CR 54 of 2016 and notice was issued to the husband.

6. The husband filed written objection against the complaint of his wife. In his written objection he stated that his wife filed a false and frivolous complaint against him. According to him, she was very arrogant and torturous right from the beginning of their marriage. But he condoned her conduct and wanted to continue the relationship. He noticed no change in her behavior even after the birth of their son. After he was transferred to the court of District and Sessions Judge at Kailashahar, he had taken his wife and child to there from where the wife used to visit her parents at A