Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
Anish Pramod Patel - Appellant
Versus
Kiran Jyot Maini - Respondent
Cr.REV.P. 298 of 2023 & Cr.M.A. 7428 of 2023, 7429 of 2023 & 15927 of 2023
Decided On : 01-12-2023
Maintenance - Domestic Violence - PWDV Act, 2005, Section 12, 23, 29 - The court remanded the issue of interim maintenance payable to the respondent-wife by the petitioner-husband under Section 20 read with 23 of PWDV Act, after directing both the parties to file their Affidavits of Disclosure of Income/Assets and hearing arguments afresh from both sides, and in accordance with law including the guidelines laid down in case of Rajnesh v. Neha (supra) by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The learned Trial Court shall also decide afresh as to whether any amount of maintenance is payable to the daughter of respondent herein, as per law. The aforesaid issue shall be decided by the learned Trial Court within a period of 3 months from date of receipt of this order. In the meanwhile, the petitioner herein is directed to pay Rs.45,000/- per month to the respondent herein, till the learned Trial Court decides the issue of interim maintenance afresh. This amount has been decided keeping in mind that the learned Sessions Court in the present case had fixed the interim maintenance of Rs.45,000/- for the respondent, and the Hon'ble Apex Court had also directed the petitioner to pay the same amount to the respondent during the pendency of transfer petitions. It is however clarified that in case the Trial Court awards interim maintenance which is lesser than the amount of interim maintenance already decided in this case, the amount paid in excess will be adjusted in the future amount of maintenance/interim maintenance to be paid by the petitioner herein.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to set aside the orders dated 10.05.2018 and 01.02.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar, respectively, granting interim maintenance to the respondent-wife under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('PWDV Act'). The petitioner contended that the respondent-wife had concealed her employment status and assets to procure favorable orders. The respondent-wife argued that the petitioner had not complied with the maintenance orders and was a man of means.
Finding of the Court:
The court remanded the issue of interim maintenance to the learned Trial Court for fresh consideration after directing both parties to file Affidavits of Disclosure of Income/Assets. The petitioner was directed to pay Rs.45,000/- per month to the respondent-wife until the Trial Court decides the issue afresh. The court clarified that any excess amount paid would be adjusted in the future maintenance/interim maintenance to be paid by the petitioner.
Issues: The main issue was the grant of interim maintenance to the respondent-wife under the PWDV Act. The court also addressed the concealment of employment status and assets by the respondent-wife and the non-compliance with maintenance orders by the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of filing Affidavits of Disclosure of Income/Assets in maintenance proceedings and directed both parties to do so. The court also clarified that the respondent-wife cannot be denied payment of maintenance and directed the petitioner to continue paying Rs.45,000/- per month until the Trial Court decides the issue afresh.
Final Decision: The court remanded the issue of interim maintenance to the learned Trial Court for fresh consideration after directing both parties to file Affidavits of Disclosure of Income/Assets. The petitioner was directed to pay Rs.45,000/- per month to the respondent-wife until the Trial Court decides the issue afresh. The court clarified that any excess amount paid would be adjusted in the future maintenance/interim maintenance to be paid by the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. - The instant petition under Sections 397 and 401 read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following prayers:
i. Setting aside of Impugned Order dated 10.05.2018 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar in Complaint Case bearing no. 4622 of 2016 (new Case No. 691 of 2022) titled as `Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel'.
ii. Setting aside of Impugned Order dated 01.02.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Gautam Budh Nagar in Appeals bearing No. 39 & 62 of 2018 preferred against the order dated 10.05.2018.
2. In the present case, the case of the respondent-wife, as per the counter affidavit filed on behalf of her, is that she had met the petitioner in Canada where the petitioner had proposed to her and the behaviour of the petitioner had been very cordial and friendly during the courtship period. Further, both the petitioner and the respondent had been divorced at that time and the respondent had a daughter from her previous marriage. The marriage between the petitioner-husband and respondent-wife was solemnized on 30.04.2015. It is stated that soon after the marriage, the parties had left for their honeymoon where the petitioner had revealed about his intimate relations as well as live-in relations with other women and how he expected the respondent to be normal with him continuing with those relations. As per respondent, she was shocked to hear all these things but she was afraid of having another failed marriage and thus, she continued in this relation for her and her daughter's sake. Thereafter, the behavior of the petitioner had started getting worse towards both the respondent and her daughter, and the petitioner had also started demanding dowry so that he could live a luxurious life. The respondent had thereafter found out about petitioner's second divorce and when she had confronted him, he had started abusing and beating her. Since then, the relationship between the parties had kept on worsening as the petitioner would beat and abuse the respondent every day. As per respondent, she had to run from pillar to post to meet the daily expenses as well as the school fees of her daughter since the petitioner had failed to look after the needs of respondent and her daughter. As stated by respondent, on 19.03.2016, the petitioner had handed over the divorce papers to the respondent and had forced her to settle the same amicably and after handing the divorce papers, he had left the matrimonial home and had not returned for days with no information as to where he had gone. The respondent had then pleaded the petitioner to stay with her and her daughter but he had asked the respondent to leave the matrimonial home. The situations deteriorated to an extent that the respondent was forced to leave the matrimonial home with her daughter and she had come back to Delhi from her matrimonial home in Mumbai.
3. Thereafter, an FIR bearing no. 34/2016 was registered on the complaint of respondent at Police Station Mahila Thana, Gautam Buddh Nagar, U.P. under Sections 498A/323/504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition before the High Court of Allahabad for stay on arrest and quashing of the FIR. Pursuant to the same, on 06.05.2016, the High Court of Allahabad had passed the order by way of which the matter was referred to mediation and an order of stay of arrest of petitioner was passed. However, on 22.09.2016, the High Court of Allahabad had dismissed the writ petition due to lack of merits. Thereafter, the respondent had filed an Application No. 4622 of 2016 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (`PWDV Act') before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, wherein an application seeking interim maintenance had also been filed by her under Section
The importance of filing Affidavits of Disclosure of Income/Assets in maintenance proceedings and the obligation to pay maintenance to the respondent-wife.
The court emphasized the responsibility of the respondent to pay arrears of maintenance to the petitioner and highlighted the requirement of filing Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with maintenance orders and directed the respondent to pay 20% of the arrears of maintenance within 20 days.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of actual earnings, standard of living, and liabilities in determining the maintenance amount under the Protection of Women from Dom....
The obligation of an able-bodied husband to maintain his wife and minor child, and the consideration of income and expenses in determining the maintenance amount.
The obligation of a husband to maintain his wife under Section 125 of the CrPC is a statutory duty, and the assessment of maintenance must consider the husband's income and the wife's financial needs....
Grant of interim maintenance – Magistrate is required to find out what is required by wife to maintain a standard of living which is neither luxurious nor penurious but is modestly consistent with st....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the affidavit of assets and liabilities in determining the quantum of interim maintenance allowance and the need for ....
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
