Case Note & Summary
The case involves two criminal writ petitions filed by Smt. Bharati Naik challenging orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mapusa, and the Sessions Court, Panaji, which rejected her application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, on the ground that she was a divorced woman and thus not entitled to maintain the application. The petitioner had married respondent No.1, Ravi Ramnath Halarnkar, but the marriage was dissolved by divorce. Subsequently, she filed an application under Section 12 of the Act seeking reliefs. The Magistrate and the Sessions Court held that a divorced woman cannot be an 'aggrieved person' under the Act. The High Court examined the definitions under the Act, particularly 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) and 'aggrieved person' under Section 2(a). The Court noted that 'domestic relationship' includes a relationship in the nature of marriage, and a woman who has lived in such a relationship is entitled to protection even after divorce. The Court held that the Act is a beneficial legislation intended to protect women from domestic violence, and its provisions should be interpreted liberally. Therefore, a divorced woman who had a domestic relationship with the respondent can file an application under Section 12. The Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter to the Magistrate for fresh consideration on merits.
Headnote
A) Domestic Violence - Maintenance - Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Divorced Woman - The issue was whether a divorced woman can maintain an application under Section 12 of the Act. The Court held that the definition of 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) includes a relationship in the nature of marriage, and a divorced woman who had lived in such a relationship is an 'aggrieved person' under Section 2(a). Therefore, a divorced woman can file an application under Section 12. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a divorced woman can file an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petitions, set aside the impugned orders, and remanded the matter to the JMFC for fresh consideration on merits in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Divorced woman can file application under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- 2005
- Domestic relationship includes relationship in the nature of marriage even after divorce
- Definition of 'aggrieved person' includes woman who has lived in a domestic relationship
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (02) 96
Criminal Writ Petition No. 18 of 2009 and Criminal Writ Petition No. 64 of 2009
Ms. Caroline Collasso (for petitioner), Ms. Winnie Coutinho (Public Prosecutor for respondent No.2)
Shri Ravi Ramnath Halarnkar, State of Goa
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petitions challenging orders rejecting application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 on ground that petitioner is a divorced woman.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside orders of JMFC and Sessions Court and to allow her application under Section 12 of the Act.
Filing Reason
Petitioner's application under Section 12 was rejected by JMFC and confirmed by Sessions Court on the ground that she is a divorced woman and not entitled to maintain the application.
Previous Decisions
JMFC Mapusa rejected application on 9.2.2007; Additional Sessions Judge confirmed on 2.7.2007 in Criminal Appeal No.14/2007; in other petition, JMFC rejected on 30.9.2008 and Sessions Judge confirmed on 17.10.2008.
Issues
Whether a divorced woman can file an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Act is a beneficial legislation and a divorced woman is an 'aggrieved person' under Section 2(a) read with Section 2(f).
Respondent No.1 did not appear; State submitted to the court's decision.
Ratio Decidendi
A divorced woman who had lived in a domestic relationship with the respondent is an 'aggrieved person' under Section 2(a) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and can maintain an application under Section 12 of the Act. The definition of 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) includes a relationship in the nature of marriage, and such relationship does not cease upon divorce for the purpose of seeking relief under the Act.
Judgment Excerpts
The above Petitions raise a common issue as to whether a divorced woman can file an application under Section 12 of the Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
The definition of 'domestic relationship' under Section 2(f) includes a relationship in the nature of marriage, and a divorced woman who had lived in such a relationship is an 'aggrieved person' under Section 2(a).
Procedural History
Petitioner filed application under Section 12 of the Act before JMFC Mapusa, which was rejected on 9.2.2007. Appeal to Additional Sessions Judge was dismissed on 2.7.2007. In another petition, JMFC rejected application on 30.9.2008, and Sessions Judge confirmed on 17.10.2008. Both orders were challenged in these writ petitions.
Acts & Sections
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: Section 12, Section 2(a), Section 2(f)
