Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 5297
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
GAJENDRA SINGH, J
SMT. PREETI JAIN AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
ANKUR JAIN AND OTHERS – Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3650 of 2024 | CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3753 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Astha Nagori
For the Respondents: Shri Bharat Yadav
The court upheld the interim maintenance order under the Domestic Violence Act, emphasizing that such orders can be granted without formal affidavits at preliminary stages, reflecting the urgency of domestic violence protection.
Headnote:(A) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 23 - Interim maintenance - Appellants sought enhancement of maintenance under domestic violence provisions; initial orders upheld while revising amounts based on financial circumstances - The court found no substantial ground for revision. (Paras 1, 6, 11)
(B) Interpretation of statute - Court maintained that provisional orders are within the preview of Judicial Magistrate considering domestic violence claims without formal affidavit in preliminary stages. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The case concerns petitions for enhancing maintenance amounts awarded under the Act following separation and circumstances around the wife’s and children’s living conditions.
Findings of Court:
The appellate court's order enhancing maintenance was based on recorded findings, with no merit found for challenge on grounds pertaining to residence and earning capacity.
Issues: The core issue centered on the adequacy of the interim maintenance and the husband’s claims of the wife’s earning ability and the validity of not requiring a formal affidavit prior to granting maintenance.
Ratio Decidendi: Procedure allows interim orders to be granted where domestic violence is alleged without needing detailed affidavit, affirming that the magistrate acted within its jurisdiction under the Domestic Violence Act.
Result: Both criminal revisions are hereby dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments regarding the sufficiency of maintenance and earning capacity. (Para 6) |
ORDER These criminal revision have been preferred challenging order dated
17.05.2024 in Criminal Appeal No.26/2022 by Additional sessions Judge, to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhikangaon, West Nimar, District Mandleshwar arising out of order dated 19.09.2022 in MJCR No.108/2020 by JMFC Bhikangaon, whereby an amount of Rs.5,000/- has been awarded to respondent no.1/ wife Smt. Priti Jain, Rs.3,500/- each has been awarded to minor children Aryan and Swastishree under section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred as "the Act"). Criminal Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT Revision No.3650 of 2024 has been preferred by wife Priti Jain for enhancement of amount of interim maintenance whereas for setting aside the order dated 19.09.2022 and 17.05.2024 Criminal Revision No.3753/2024 has been preferred by husband Ankur Jain.
2. Facts of the case in brief are that marriage of Priti and Ankur was solemnized on 16.01.2011. A male child Aryan was born on 26.09.2011 and a girl child Swastishree was born on 07.11.2017 from their wedlock. Controversy arose between the period when Priti was on advance stage of her pregnancy regarding girl child and application under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was preferred on 22.12.2020 before the JMFC Bhikangaon, West Nimar seeking various reliefs under the Act.
3. Wife and children also prayed for relief under section 23 of the Act and claimed Rs.1,45,000/- per month and bifurcation was stated that Rs.1,00,000/- maintenance for wife, Rs.10,000/- for rent, Rs.25,000/- for male child and Rs.10,000/- for girl child.
4. Application was opposed through filing the reply and trial court allowed the application partially vide order dated 14.09.2022 and an amount of Rs.1,000/- per month for each of the claimant was awarded. The order was challenged by claimants by filing the appeal and appellate court modified the order of the trial court and enhanced amount of interim maintenance to the extent as mentioned para-1 of the judgment of the appellate court.
5. Challenging the impugned order these criminal revision have been preferred by the parties.
6. Criminal Revision No.3753/2024 is preferred on the ground that appellate court failed to consider that the claimants were residing separately at their own will. Wife is also an earning member and has a better earning capacity. The order Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT has been passed without calling the affidavit as per the mandate of legislation in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha (2021) 2 SCC 324 .
7. Criminal Revision No.3650/2024 is preferred on the ground that husband is engaged in a wholesale medical business and earns Rs.3,00,000/- per month. Family have property business and also earns from other sources of earning including pension also. The amount is not sufficient to fulfill their basic needs.
8. Heard.
9. Perused the record.
10. Before adverting to the controversy, section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is reproduced below:-
"23. Power to grant interim and ex parte orders (1) In any proceeding before him under this Act, the Magistrate may pass such interim order as he deems just and proper.
(2) If the Magistrate is satisfied that an application prima facie discloses that the respondent is committing, or has committed an act of domestic violence or that there is a likelihood that the respondent may commit an act of domestic violence, he may grant an ex parte order on the basis of the affidavit in such form, as may be prescribed, of the aggrieved person under section 18, section 19, section 20, section 21 or, as the case may be, section 22 against the respondent."
11. The above provisions empowers the concerned JMFC to pass even an exparte order on satisfaction that domestic violence has taken place. Relationship is not in dispute.
