Order 1

Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 74/DV/2018
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
44th COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
C. C. No. 74/DV/2018.
Mrs. Soghara Sadiq Abidi .. Aggrieved Woman
V/s
Mr. Sadiq Abu Bakar Abidi and Ors. .. Respondents
ORDER PASSED BELOW APPLICATION FILED BY THE AGGRIEVED
WOMAN FOR INTERIM RELIEF
This is an affidavit under section 23 (2) of Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 filed by aggrieved woman
namely Mrs. Soghara Sadiq Abidi against the respondents for interim
reliefs i.e. protection order and adinterim maintenance of Rs.25,000/ per
month, compensation of Rs.50,000/ and protection order against the
respondent No.1. Mr. Sadiq Abu Bakar Abidi.
2). The aggrieved woman stated that she married with respondent
No.1 Sadiq Abu Bakar Abidi on 29.12.2015 at Diamond Hall, Varanasi,
U.P. and remaining respondents are his relatives. The entire cost of the
function was borne and paid by the mother of the applicant and transferred
Rs.30,000/ in the account of respondent No.5. Her mother spent
Rs.15,00,000/ towards the expenses of said marriage. Her parents relatives
and well wishers gifted worth Rs.10,00,000/ and ornaments of
Rs.3,00,000/. The Mehr amount of Rs.14,000/. After marriage applicant
started to reside in matrimonial house. However, after one week the
respondents started to illtreat her mentally on the point of insufficient
jwelleries. They withdrawn their maid and compelled applicant to do
-- 1 of 6 --
2 C. C. No. 74/DV/2018
household work. Respondent No.3 took out her all jwelleries under the
pretext of keeping the same in safe custody and then refused to return.
Respondent No.1 has extra marital affairs with some other girls and he used
to chat with them and threatened her. He abused and assaulted to her. The
respondent used to prevent the applicant from talking with her mother and
sister and snatched her mobile. On 05.09.2016, they made the applicant,
her father to stand in front of their house for six hours. They caused
physical and mental toucher and therefore, she reached to Mumbai on
07.09.2016. She lodged N.C. report No.2173/2016 dated 07.09.2016 under
section 507 with Versova police station. The respondent committed criminal
breach of trust and misappropriation about her jwellery. Hence, lastly she
lodged FIR vide Crime No.469/2017 under section 498(A), 406, 323, 504,
506 of IPC on 23.12.2017. The applicant further alleged that respondent
no.1 is Sales Executive in Nexa Showroom at Allahabad and having the
salary of Rs.50,000/ per month. He has also three separate houses in
Allahabad city. Other respondents also having property. Therefore, the
applicant prayed monthly maintenance of Rs.25,000/, compensation of
Rs.50,000/ and other relief. Hence, this application.
3). Respondents filed reply on 16.08.2018 and denied all the
allegations. On the other hand, the respondents alleged that the applicant is
working in multinational company M/s. Jaawidaan and earning
Rs.1,00,000/ per month. Hence, respondent No.1 prayed that the applicant
should pay Rs.1,00,000/ to him. The respondent No.1 further alleged that
he was working with M/s. Naxa Showroom and drawing salary of
Rs.15,000/ per month, but due to harassment of the applicant he left the
job and he is now unemployed. Hence, application be rejected.
-- 2 of 6 --
3 C. C. No. 74/DV/2018
4). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, following
points arose for determination, to which findings are recorded as under :
Sr.
No.
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether the aggrieved woman is
entitled to get Rs.25,000/ (towards
maintenance per month from the date
of application ?
: Partly
Affirmative.
2. Whether the aggrieved woman is
entitled to get compensation of
Rs.50,000 ?
Negative.
3. Whether the aggrieved woman is
entitled to get protection order
against the respondents ?
Affirmative.
4. What order ? : As per the final
order.
R E A S O N :
AS TO POINTS NO.1 TO 3 :
5). Heard the learned advocates of the applicant and respondents.
The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant was
subjected to domestic violence, she is in need of Rs.25,000/ per month ad
interim relief towards maintenance. She was unable to maintain herself.
On the other hand, the respondent No.1 has attractive monthly income of
Rs.50,000/ per month. Therefore, interim relief be granted.
6). Per contra the learned advocate for respondents argued that
the applicant herself left the company of the respondent and all the
allegation against them are false. The respondent No.1 has left the job and
-- 3 of 6 --
4 C. C. No. 74/DV/2018
therefore, he is unable to give separate maintenance to the applicant. The
learned advocate further argued that the applicant is earning Rs.1,00,000/
per month by working with the multinational company. Therefore, the
application be rejected.
7). To provide for more effective protection of the rights of women
guaranteed under the Constitution of India who are victims of violence of
any kind occurring within the family, the said Act of 2005 came into
existence on 13.09.2005. Section 2 (a) of said Act of 2005 defined the term
“aggrieved person” means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic
relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to
any act of domestic violence by the respondent. Section 2(g) defined
“domestic violence” as assigned in section 3. Section 18 of the said Act
empowered the court to issue protection order for restraining the
respondent to commit domestic violence. Section 17 read with section 19 of
the said Act entitled an aggrieved person of right to reside in share
household. Under section 20 and 22 the court is empowered to award
monitory reliefs and compensation to the aggrieved person. Till decision of
an application under section 12 of the said Act, the court is empowered to
grant interim reliefs under section 23 of the said Act. All the proceeding
under above section shall governed by the provisions of Criminal Procedure
Code 1973, but the Court may lay down its own procedure for disposal of
an application under section 12 or under sub section 2 of Section 23 of the
said Act by virtue of Section 28 of Domestic Violence Act.
7). Having heard learned advocate for both the parties, I have
gone through the entire record.
-- 4 of 6 --
5 C. C. No. 74/DV/2018
8). Thus, considering the material on the record, it appears that
the applicant alleged the physical violence by the respondents. The
applicant has produced medical papers to show that she was subjected to
medical treatment. She also produced copy of N.C. report and FIR under
section 498(A) of IPC. All these material are sufficient prima facie to hold
that the applicant was subjected to domestic violence. This fact prima facie
disclosed that the respondent No.1 is committing and has committed an act
of domestic violence and there is likelihood that the respondent No.1 may
commit an act of domestic violence. According to the applicant she has no
source of income when she was living with the respondent. Therefore, the
aggrieved women is entitled the interim reliefs against the respondents.
However, there is no evidence on record about the quantum of earning of
respondent No.1. Hence, considering the social status of both the parties, if
the respondent No.1 is directed to pay Rs.10,000/per month towards
maintenance including rent then he can easily pay the said amount and the
applicant can lead the life. Hence, points No.1 is recorded in partly
affirmative, point No.2 is recorded in negative and 3 is recording in the
affirmative and to answer point No.4 following order is passed.
ORDER
i) An application under section 23 of Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is allowed
as under.
ii) The respondent No.1 is directed to pay Rs.10,000/
per month towards maintenance including rent to
Mrs. Soghara Sadiq Abidi from the date of
application.
-- 5 of 6 --
6 C. C. No. 74/DV/2018
iii) The protection order under section 18 of the said Act
is issued in favour of aggrieved woman Mrs.Soghara
Sadiq Abidi and against the respondents that they
shall not commit any domestic violence on her.
iv) Copy of order be forwarded to police station Versova
for necessary action and information.
-sd/-
(S. B. Dige)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date : 30.03.2019 44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 6 of 6 --