Interim Order 1

Order Details: Interim Maintenance Order
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 167/DV/2018
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
RAILWAY MOBILE COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI
C. C. No. 167/DV/2018
Sana Ahmed Ansari ... Applicant
V/s.
Ahmed Jaffar Ansari + 1 ... Respondents
ORDER BELOW EXH. 04
1. This is an application filed by the applicant for getting
interim reliefs under the provision of Section 23 of the Protection of
Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short 'the Act').
2. In brief, it is the case of the applicant that she got married
with respondent no. 1 on 20/01/2017 as per Muslim rites at
Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai. Respondent no. 2 is mother-in-law of the
applicant. After marriage the respondents properly treated the
applicant for initial some period. Thereafter the respondents started to
ill-treat the applicant. Respondent no. 2 used to find out faults in the
work of the applicant. Respondent no. 2 also started to spread rumour
about the applicant that she is having illicit relation with her cousin
brother. The respondents also started to demand Rs. 1,50,000/- from
the parents of the applicant. During pregnancy of the applicant the
respondents were not providing proper diet to her. Respondent no. 1
used to abuse and assault the applicant. Due to which the applicant
suffered miscarriage. On 27/06/2017 the respondents abused the
applicant and they drove her out of her matrimonial home. Since then
the applicant is residing with her parents. Thereafter the applicant
lodged F.I.R. against the respondents and accordingly crime came to be
registered against the respondents in police station Meghwadi for the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406 and 504 of the Indian
-- 1 of 4 --
2 C. C. No. 167/DV/2018
Penal Code. The respondents are still threatening the applicant. The
applicant has no source of income. Hence, this application.
3. The respondents resisted the application by filing their
reply (Exh. 05). Admittedly the applicant is wife of respondent no. 1.
The respondents have denied all the adverse allegations made against
them. It is the case of the respondents that the allegations of the
applicant are baseless. After marriage the applicant resided with the
respondents only for the period of some months. The marriage of the
applicant with respondent no. 1 was love marriage and therefore there
was no question of any demand. The applicant was neglecting her
matrimonial obligations. The applicant herself has left the matrimonial
home and she is staying with her parents. The relations between the
applicant and respondent no. 1 were good. The interference of mother
of the applicant has disturbed married life of the applicant and
respondent no. 1. Respondent no. 2 is suffering from cancer and she is
unable to walk properly. The applicant know all these facts and
therefore she has left the matrimonial home. The applicant has filed
present application only to harass the respondents. The applicant has
prepared imaginary story. Hence, the application may be rejected.
4. I have gone through the record. The case is at initial stage.
Both parties have made several allegations against each other. Those
allegations may be inquired into at the time of trial. The allegations of
the applicant is supported her affidavit. The F.I.R. lodged by the
applicant against the respondents for the offences punishable under
Section 498-A, 406 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code also supports her
allegations. At this stage I do not find any reason to disbelieve the case
of the applicant. Respondent no. 1 also failed to show any convincing
reason for making false allegations against him by the applicant. At this
-- 2 of 4 --
3 C. C. No. 167/DV/2018
stage I do not find any reason for the applicant for staying at her
parental place, except the ill-treatment given to her by respondent no.
1. The allegations made by the applicant prima-facie shows that the
applicant is victim of domestic violence. Therefore, the applicant is
certainly entitled for appropriate and necessary interim reliefs under
the provisions the Act.
5. The applicant has prayed that the respondents be
restrained from causing any harassment to her. As stated above, the
record prima-facie shows that the applicant is victim of domestic
violence. Therefore, at this stage the applicant is certainly entitled for
the protection order against respondent no. 1, as prayed.
6. The applicant has prayed that respondent no. 1 be directed
to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month to her as interim maintenance. The
applicant submitted that she has no source of income. Respondent no.
1 is working as car driver with 'Ola' company and he is earning
Rs.30,000/- per month. Respondent no. 1 has submitted that he is a
driver. He is only son of respondent no. 2 who is suffering from serious
disease of cancer. He is staying at home to take care of respondent no.
2. I have considered the submissions of both parties. Admittedly, the
applicant is wife of respondent no. 1 and at present she is staying at her
parental house. Record prima-facie shows that the applicant is victim
of domestic violence. In the circumstances, it is the legal and moral
duty of respondent no. 1 to give reasonable amount to the applicant for
her interim maintenance during pendency of the proceeding.
Admittedly respondent no. 1 is a driver. There is no any material on
record regarding actual income of respondent no. 1. In the
circumstances, considering the occupation of respondent no. 1 and
status of the parties which appears from the record, it would be proper
-- 3 of 4 --
4 C. C. No. 167/DV/2018
to grant interim maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- per month to the applicant
from respondent no. 1 from the date of the application till disposal of
the case. In the result, the application is liable to be partly allowed.
Hence, the order.
ORDER
1. The application is partly allowed.
2. Respondent no. 1 is restrained from committing any act of
domestic violence against the applicant.
3. Respondent no. 1 shall pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to the
applicant for her interim maintenance from the date of the application
till disposal of the case.
4. Costs in the cause.
(Imran R. Marchiya)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Railway Mobile Court,
Date : 25/11/2019 Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 4 of 4 --