BOMBAY HIGH COURT
R.D. Dhanuka and V.G. Bisht, JJ.
Dr. Sandip Mrinmoy Chakrabarty —Appellant
versus
Mrs. Reshita Sandip Chakrabarty —Respondent
Family Court Appeal No.31 of 2020 along with Interim Application No.190 of 2019 along with Interim Application No.596 of 2019
Decided on 26.2.2021
Family Courts Act, 1984 – Section 19(1) – Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Sections 12 and 26 – Maintainability of Family Court Appeal – In divorce petition and domestic violence petition, most of facts are on same footings and nature of evidence to some extent was same – Domestic violence case has been transferred to Family Court for trial with divorce petition – Domestic Violence Act nowhere makes any reference to character or nature of proceedings that are initiated under Domestic Violence Act – Rights created and remedies provided for in Domestic Violence Act are basically of civil nature – By specific provisions, authority has been conferred even upon Civil Courts, in addition to Criminal Courts, under Section 26 of Domestic Violence Act, to deal with an application filed for seeking various remedies provided under Section 18 to 22 of Domestic Violence Act – Making of Criminal and Civil Courts simultaneously as appropriate to obtain reliefs provided under Domestic Violence Act is a certain pointer to fact that character of proceeding is not dependent upon nature of Tribunal which is invested with authority to grant relief, but upon nature of right violated and kind of relief that may be had – All reliefs sought by respondent and granted by Family Court were of civil nature and did not attract any offence punishable under criminal law – The moment both proceedings came to be clubbed by judicial order of this Court and directed to be tried together, jurisdiction of Family Court became abundantly clear over proceedings under Domestic Violence Act – Instant Family Court Appeal challenging common order including in proceedings arising out of provisions of Domestic Violence Act is maintainable. (Paras 27, 32, 38, 42, 47 and 48)
Result: Matter listed for next hearing.
ORDER (ORAL)
R.D. Dhanuka, J.—This Court by an order dated 3rd December, 2020 directed to place this matter on board for deciding the issue of maintainability raised by the respondent-wife to the extent of challenge to the order of maintenance passed by the Family Court under the provisions of Protect of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short ‘the said Domestic Violence Act’) on the ground that Criminal Revision Application is maintainable against that part of the order passed by the Family Court and not this Family Court Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding the issue of maintainability of the Family Court Appeal No. 31 of 2020 raised by the respondent are as under :-
2. Respondent had filed a petition for divorce against the appellant on the ground of adultery and cruelty on 16th December, 2013. The said petition was filed under the provisions of Special Marriage Act, 1954. The appellant had filed written statement and also a counter claim in the said petition and prayed for divorce on the ground of cruelty against the respondent.
3. On 11th February, 2014, the respondent-wife filed the proceedings alleging domestic violence on the part of the appellant before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune. Respondent initially filed a divorce petition bearing P.A. No. 1374 of 2012 on 3rd December, 2012 on the ground of cruelty and adultery. The said petition was however withdrawn on 10th December, 2012. The respondent subsequently filed the second petition bearing P.A. No. 1426 of 2012 on 17th December, 2012 for divorce.
4. The appellant herein filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 4649 of 2015 against the respondent and another in this Court inter-alia praying for transfer of the proceedings pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Cantonment Court, Pune to the Family Court, Pune and for clubbing with petition for divorce filed by the respondent before the Family Court at Pune. By an order dated 6th December, 2018 passed by this Court the said Writ Petition was allowed. This Court noticed that the respondent had also sought necessary reliefs in the form of grant of permanent physical custody of the minor son and also alimony pendente lite at Rs.75,000/- per month under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, apart from the relief of dissolution of marriage under the said Act. The respondent no.1 had also sought to grant permanent alimony and maintenance to the tune of Rs.2 crores in her favour under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. The respondent had also prayed for grant of interim maintenance and also for payment of damages against the appellant.
5. In the said proceedings filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, the respondent had filed an application under Section 12 of the said Domestic Violence Act on 11th February, 2014. The parents of the appellant herein were also impleaded as parties respondent. This Court referred to the prayers in those proceedings filed by the respondent before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class. It was contended by the appellant’s advocate before this Court that the principles of Section 26 of the said Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is to ensure that any relief available under Sections 18 to 22 can be sought in any legal proceedings before a Civil Court, Family Court or a Criminal Court, whether such proceedings were initiated before or after commencement of the said Domestic Violence Act. It was contended that jurisdiction vested in the Family Court is wide enough to consider all the reliefs that have been prayed in the application specifically preferred under Section 12 of the said Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
6. In the said order dated 6th September, 2018 passed by this Court, after perusing the application filed by both the parties, this Court observed that there was overlapping of certain reliefs. The reliefs which were sought in the p
Kunaprareddy alias Nookala Shanka Balaji v. Kunapareddy Swarna Kumari
(1) Appeal under Section 19(1) of Family Courts Act, 1984 is maintainable also in respect of reliefs granted by Family Court claimed under provisions of Domestic Violence Act along with reliefs grant....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the reliefs granted in the domestic violence proceedings were of civil nature, making the Family Court Appeal challenging the order maintainab....
The findings of the Family Court in a maintenance order under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. do not have a binding effect on the Courts dealing with the DV Act, and the order under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. can....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the aggrieved person has the right to seek relief under the Domestic Violence Act at any stage, even if living separately from the respondent.
Maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act is supplementary to that under Section 125 of the CrPC, and previous awards must be disclosed and considered in subsequent claims.
The court established that reliefs under the DV Act are civil, and appeals against such orders cannot be treated as criminal proceedings.
Proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are predominantly of civil nature and it is only when there is a breach of the protection order as is contemplated under sec....
A divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., regardless of her marital status, emphasizing the husband's obligation to provide for his wife and children.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.