Full Order Text
Order 1 · 25 Nov 2019 · CNR MHMM190091082018
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 --
