Bombay High Court Allows Husband's Application to Dismiss Wife's Maintenance Petition Under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 for Non-Prosecution. Wife's Cross-Application for Enhancement of Maintenance Dismissed as Withdrawn Due to Non-Appearance.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 97
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves two miscellaneous civil applications arising from proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The husband, Manoj Dnyaneshwar Sattyavijay, filed MCA/312/2024 seeking dismissal of his wife Rinku Manoj Sattyavijay's application under Section 12 of the DV Act on the ground of non-prosecution. The wife had filed the original application seeking maintenance, but failed to appear on several hearing dates. The wife, in turn, filed MCA/42/2024 seeking enhancement of maintenance. Both applications were heard together by the Bombay High Court. The court noted that the wife was absent on the date of hearing and her counsel sought withdrawal of her application for enhancement. The court allowed the husband's application and dismissed the wife's Section 12 application for non-prosecution, and permitted the wife to withdraw her cross-application, dismissing it as withdrawn. No costs were awarded.

Headnote

A) Family Law - Maintenance under DV Act - Dismissal for Non-Prosecution - Section 12, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Wife filed application under Section 12 of DV Act seeking maintenance - Husband filed application for dismissal on ground of non-prosecution - Wife failed to appear on multiple dates - Court held that wife had lost interest in prosecuting her application - Application dismissed for non-prosecution (Paras 1-3).

B) Family Law - Maintenance under DV Act - Withdrawal of Application - Section 12, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Wife filed cross-application for enhancement of maintenance - Wife's counsel sought withdrawal of application - Court permitted withdrawal and dismissed the application as withdrawn (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the wife's application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 should be dismissed for non-prosecution, and whether the husband's application for dismissal should be allowed.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed MCA/312/2024 and dismissed the wife's application under Section 12 of the DV Act for non-prosecution. The court permitted the wife to withdraw MCA/42/2024 and dismissed it as withdrawn. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Maintenance under DV Act
  • Dismissal for non-prosecution
  • Withdrawal of application
  • Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
  • 2005
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (09) 119

Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 312 of 2024 and Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 42 of 2024

2025-08-22

Kamal Khata, J.

2025:BHC-AS:37023

Mr. Shantanu Deshpande (VC) a/w. Adv. Aishwarya Gaikwad i/by Divya Pawar for the Applicant in MCA/312/2024 and for the Respondent in MCA/42/2024; Mr. Mahendra M. Agavekar for the Applicant in MCA/42/2024 and for the Respondent in MCA/312/2024

Manoj S/o. Dnyaneshwar Sattyavijay (in MCA/312/2024); Rinku Manoj Sattyavijay (in MCA/42/2024)

Rinku Manoj Sattyavijay (in MCA/312/2024); Manoj Nana Sattyavijay and Sagar Kailash Girgosavi (in MCA/42/2024)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Miscellaneous civil applications under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

Remedy Sought

Husband sought dismissal of wife's maintenance application for non-prosecution; wife sought enhancement of maintenance

Filing Reason

Wife filed application under Section 12 of DV Act for maintenance; husband filed application for dismissal due to non-prosecution; wife filed cross-application for enhancement

Issues

Whether the wife's application under Section 12 of the DV Act should be dismissed for non-prosecution Whether the wife's cross-application for enhancement of maintenance should be allowed

Submissions/Arguments

Husband argued that wife failed to appear on multiple dates, indicating loss of interest in prosecuting her application Wife's counsel sought withdrawal of her cross-application for enhancement

Ratio Decidendi

An application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the applicant fails to appear and shows no interest in prosecuting the matter.

Judgment Excerpts

The Applicant in MCA/312/2024 is the husband and the Applicant in MCA/42/2024 is the wife. The wife has not appeared on several dates and has lost interest in prosecuting her application under Section 12 of the DV Act. The wife's counsel seeks withdrawal of MCA/42/2024.

Procedural History

The husband filed MCA/312/2024 seeking dismissal of wife's Section 12 application for non-prosecution. The wife filed MCA/42/2024 seeking enhancement of maintenance. Both applications were heard together on 22nd August 2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: Section 12
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses DISCOM's Appeal in Solar PPA Force Majeure Dispute — Restrictive Appellate Jurisdiction Under Section 125 of Electricity Act, 2003 Affirmed. Government Delays in Approvals Constitute Force Majeure; No Tariff Reduction or Liq...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses State Appeal in Wife's Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Dying Declarations and Conduct Consistent with Innocence. Multiple Dying Declarations Under Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Contained Discrepancies as to Location ...