Final Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: Judgment ~1~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 Filed on : 29/07/2022.
Registered on : 29/07/2022.
Decided on : 24/04/2026.
Duration :
Years Months Days
03 08 26
Exh. :
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, (FIRST CLASS),
71ST COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY SHRI. ATUL B. JADHAV)
(J.O.Code-MH1900)
C. C. No.135/DV/2022
RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN MUKTAR
AHMED @ RAHMEEN SABIR ALI
SHAIKH
Age: 34 Years.
Occupation : Housewife.
Address: C/O SABIR ALI SHAIKH, ROOM
NO.-108, BUILDING NO.-13 CHS LTD.,
MOTILAL NEHRU NAGAR, B.K.C
BANDRA-E, MUMBAI 51.
…. Applicant.
V/s.
1 INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR AHMED SON
OF HAFIZUR REHMAN.
Age: 45 Years.
Occupation : Artist.
Address: HAFEJUR RAHMAN,
DARGAAH SHARIF BAHRAAICH,
UTTAR PRADESH-271801.
-- 1 of 10 --
Judgment ~2~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
2 ANWAR AHMED.
Age: 48 Years.
Occupation : Painter.
Address: HAFEJUR RAHMAN,
DARGAAH SHARIF BAHRAAICH,
UTTAR PRADESH-271801.
3 SHAKRA BANO ANWAR AHMED.
Age: Adult.
Occupation : Housewife.
Address: HAFEJUR RAHMAN,
DARGAAH SHARIF BAHRAAICH,
UTTAR PRADESH-271801.
4 MUMTAAZ @ MASHAALLAH AHMED.
Age: Adult.
Occupation : Painter.
Address: HAFEJUR RAHMAN,
DARGAAH SHARIF BAHRAAICH,
UTTAR PRADESH-271801.
5 AFREEN MUMTAAZ @ MASHALLAH
AHMED.
Age: Adult.
Occupation : Housewife.
Address: HAFEJUR RAHMAN,
DARGAAH SHARIF BAHRAAICH,
UTTAR PRADESH-271801.
6 JAHIRUDDIN AHMED.
Age: Adult.
Occupation : NIL.
Address: HAFEJUR RAHMAN,
DARGAAH SHARIF BAHRAAICH,
UTTAR PRADESH-271801. …. Respondents.
Appearance : Learned Advocate Sushma Kulkarni for the applicant.
: Proceeding exparte against respondents.
-- 2 of 10 --
Judgment ~3~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
J u d g m e n t D a t e :-24/04/2026
The applicant has filed the present proceeding under the
provisions of The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act,
2005 (here-in-after referred as, 'the PWDV Act') against respondents for
protection order and for monetary reliefs.
2. The applicant’s case in nutshell as under,
The respondent No.1 is her husband and respondent No.2
and No.4 are her brother-in-law and No.3 and No.5 are her sister-in-
laws and No.6 is her uncle-in-law. It is contended that, her marriage
with respondent No.1 taken place on 17/05/2007, at Zilla Gondda,
Khurasa Bazar, Uttar Pradesh. The applicant and respondent No.1 have
adopted child by name Iqra, who born on 17/05/2014 and child by
name Mohd. Faisal who born on 29/04/2016. Both children are under
the custody and care of the applicant. She lives with her husband i.e.
respondent No.1 in his village at Uttar Pradesh alongwith other
respondents.
3. It is further contended that, the respondent No.1 has not
paid Mehar amount of I.11,786/- to applicant. After marriage went at
her matrimonial home at Uttar Pradesh and after two days she returned
back to her mother’s place for Gaunna, as per their custom. She stayed
there for three months. Respondent No.1 took the applicant to his house
at Uttar Pradesh
4. It is further contended that, respondent No.3 and No.5
were well educated and they used to take advantage of the applicant, as
she was not well educated. They used to make false allegations and
used faulty language against applicant. They always harassed and
-- 3 of 10 --
Judgment ~4~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
tortured to the applicant. All the respondents were not given any
importance in any function to the applicant. All respondents used to
make false allegations against applicant, they gave abusive language on
her parents, which created mental torture to the applicant.
5. It is further contended that, the respondents also not given
much importance to children Iqra and Faisal. It is contended that, the
respondent No.1 used to have vigorous sex with her. He used to insert
inhumanly glass bottle in the vagina to the applicant. The respondent
No.1 is sex addicted person. She has been sexually harassed by the
respondent No.1.
6. It is further contended that, the respondents have not given
medical treatment to the applicant. Thus, according to her she has been
verbally and financially abused by the respondents. She is victim of
sexual abuse at the hands of respondent No.1. Thus, according to
applicant she is aggrieved person and sought relief of protection order
against respondents and monetary relief against respondent No.1. The
applicant prayed for maintenance of I.20,000/- p.m. for both children
each and I.10,000/- p.m. for herself. She also sought relief of
compensation to the tune of I.50,00,000/- from respondents.
7. The respondents in view of the postal receipts and postal
reports which are at (Exh.-3) to (Exh.-5) duly served with notice. But
they failed to appear, therefore, the proceeding is proceeded exparte
against them by order dated 30/12/2023.
8. Considering the contentions of the applicant following
points are arises for determination. I have recorded my findings thereon
for the reasons, as under :-
-- 4 of 10 --
Judgment ~5~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
Sr. No. Points Findings
1. Does the applicant proved that, she
has been subjected domestic
violence at the hands of
respondents and she is aggrieved
person ?
Partly Affirmative.
2. Is applicant entitled for relief of
Protection Order, as she prayed? Affirmative.
3. Is applicant entitled for
maintenance, as prayed, from the
respondent No.1 ?
Partly Affirmative.
4. Is applicant entitled for
compensation, as prayed, from the
respondent No.1 ?
Partly Affirmative.
5. What order? Application is
partly allowed.
REASONS
9. The applicant in order to substantiate her claim she relied
on her own evidence, which is at (Exh.-6). The applicant has filed her
affidavit of Assets and Liabilities at (Exh.-5). The applicant also filed on
record copies of marriage photographs, Nikha Form, etc. filed alongwith
list (Exh.-7). The applicant has closed her evidence by filing pursis
(Exh.-9).
-- 5 of 10 --
Judgment ~6~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
10. The proceeding is proceeded against respondents No.1 and
No.2 to No.6. There is no evidence adduced by the respondents and the
order to that effect is passed below (Exh.-1) on 22/01/2026.
11. I have heard elaborated arguments of Ld. Advocate Smt.
Sushma Kulkarni for the applicant.
AS TO POINT NO.1 :-
12. In order to grant relief in favour of the applicant under the
provision of Domestic Violence Act, the applicant has to prove that, she
has been subjected domestic violence at the hands of respondents. The
applicant in her evidence at (Exh.-6) reiterated her contentions made in
the application. According to the applicant the respondent No.1 is her
husband and other respondents of relatives of the respondent No.1.
13. The applicant categorically stated that, when she started to
reside in her matrimonial home with respondents, the respondent No.3
and No.5 were well educated and they took disadvantage of applicant,
as she was not well educated. It has further come in her evidence that,
she has been verbally and financially abused by the respondents. She
categorically deposed in respect of her sexual harassment at the hands
of respondent No.1, her husband. All respondents did not give any
importance to her in family functions, nor they given any importance to
her children.
14. It is to be noted that, the evidence of applicant on the point
of verbal abuse, financial abuse and sexual abuse is remain
unchallenged. The respondents failed to appear in the matter and
defend the proceeding. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the
evidence of applicant. Therefore, I hold that, applicant is subjected to
domestic violence in the nature of verbal abuse, emotional abuse,
-- 6 of 10 --
Judgment ~7~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
financial abuse at the hands of respondent No.2 to No.6 and sexual
abuse at the hands of respondent No.1. Hence, I record my finding to
point No.1, as in the partly affirmative only against respondent No.1.
AS TO POINT NO.2 :-
15. This point is in respect of the protection order sought by
the applicant against the respondents. The applicant is wife of
respondent No.1. There is domestic relationship between them. While
recording answer to the point No.1 I hold that, respondents are causing
domestic violence to the applicant. Therefore, in order to protect life
and limb of applicant the protection order can be passed against the
respondents. Hence, I record my finding to point No.2, as in the
affirmative.
AS TO POINT NO.3 :-
16. This point is in respect of prayer of maintenance by the
applicant against the respondent No.1. The applicant has claimed
maintenance of I.10,000/- p.m. for herself and I.20,000/- p.m. each to
both children from respondent No.1. It is to be noted that, Iqra and
Faisal are adopted children of applicant and respondent No.1. They are
now under the custody and care of the applicant. The applicant has no
means of maintenance.
17. On the point of maintenance the applicant relied on her
affidavit of assets and liabilities which is at (Exh.-5). I have gone
through the said affidavit, wherein she stated that, her educational
qualification is below Xth standard and her occupation is housewife. It
seems that, she has no means of maintenance for herself and for
children. While considering the financial status of respondent No.1 she
-- 7 of 10 --
Judgment ~8~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
contended that, he is getting I.2,000/- per day and he is also having
agricultural land and rented house.
18. The applicant in her affidavit of evidence (Exh.-6) deposed
that, respondent No.1 is painter and Artist and getting income of I.
2,000/- per day. I would like to state here that, the said evidence of
applicant is remain unchallenged. Therefore, there is no reason to
disbelieve the version of applicant. Being husband and father the
respondent No.1 is under obligation to maintain her wife and children.
However, there is no evidence on record to hold that, the respondent
No.1 is maintaining them. Therefore, he is liable for maintenance of
applicant and children, as per the provision of monetary relief under the
Domestic Violence Act.
19. The applicant is unable to maintain herself and also she has
no means of maintenance to maintain her children. Per contra, the
respondent No.1 is Artist and having income on the said occupation.
Therefore, considering the basic needs, education expenses and growing
age of the children I am of the opinion that, the amount of I.7,000/-
p.m. to the applicant and amount of R.4,000/- to each children per
month is sufficient for maintenance. Hence, I record my findings to
point No.3, accordingly.
AS TO POINT NO.4 :-
20. This point is in respect of compensation claimed by the
applicant. According to the applicant due to domestic violence at the
hands of respondents, she got mental agony. However, no specific
evidence adduced by the applicant in order to show that, she suffer
damages due to act of the respondent No.1. The applicant certainly
suffers mental agony for that, purpose she is entitled to compensation
-- 8 of 10 --
Judgment ~9~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
to the tune of I.75,000/- from the respondent No.1. In the result, I
record my finding I record my findings to point No.4, accordingly and I
proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
(i) Application is partly allowed only against respondents.
(ii) The respondents No.1 to No.6 shall not cause any kind
of domestic violence to the applicant.
(iii) The respondent No.1 shall pay the amount of I.7,000/-
p.m. to the applicant and I.4000/- p.m. to each child, as
a maintenance from the date of filing of present
application.
(iv) The respondent No.1 shall pay amount of I.75,000/-, as
a compensation to the applicant.
(v) The respondent shall pay amount of I.10,000/-, as a
cost of proceeding to the applicant.
(vi) The copy of the judgment be given to applicant and
respondents free of costs.
Date:-24/04/2026.
SRD.
( A. B. Jadhav )
Judicial Magistrate, (First Class),
71st Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Date:-24/04/2026.
-- 9 of 10 --
Judgment ~10~ C. C. NO.135/DV/2022
CNR No.MHMM18-007350-2022 RAHMEEN @ SAHMEEN V/s.
INSHAALLAH @ MUKHTAR & ORS.
Dictated on :- 24/04/2026.
Transcribed on :- 24/04/2026.
Checked on :- 26/02/2026.
Signed on :- 26/02/2026.
SRD
CERTIFICATE
I affirm that, the contents of this P.D.F. file judgment are same word for
word, as per original judgment.
Court Name Judicial Magistrate, (First Class),
71st Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Name of Stenographer Sandeep Rambhau Darekar.
Date of pronounce of judgment 24/04/2026.
Date of sign of judgment 26/02/2026.
Date of upload of judgment 26/02/2026.
-- 10 of 10 --