Case Note & Summary
The case involves a criminal revision application filed by the husband, Mr. Dajvip V. Patkar, challenging the judgment and order dated 22.05.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Margao, in Criminal Appeal No. 5/2015. The Sessions Judge had confirmed the order dated 09.01.2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vasco-da-Gama, rejecting the husband's application (Exhibit-10) seeking to set aside the maintenance and residence order in favor of the wife, Mrs. Vina D. Patkar. The parties were married on 27.08.2008 and the marriage was registered. Disputes arose, and both parties filed separate matrimonial petitions for dissolution of marriage. The wife also lodged a complaint under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The wife filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking reliefs under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22. The Magistrate granted reliefs including right to residence and maintenance. The husband challenged this order, but the Sessions Judge upheld it. In revision, the High Court considered the submissions. The husband argued that the property was not a shared household and that the wife was not entitled to maintenance. The wife contended that she had a right to reside in the matrimonial home and was entitled to maintenance. The High Court held that the wife has a right to reside in the shared household under Section 17 of the Act, and the order granting maintenance was justified. The court found no illegality or perversity in the impugned order and dismissed the revision application.
Headnote
A) Domestic Violence - Right to Residence - Shared Household - Section 17, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - The wife has a right to reside in the shared household, which includes the matrimonial home, irrespective of ownership. The court upheld the order granting the wife right to residence and maintenance, rejecting the husband's contention that the property was not a shared household. (Paras 2-10)
B) Domestic Violence - Maintenance - Interim Maintenance - Section 20, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - The court confirmed the order of interim maintenance to the wife, holding that the wife is entitled to maintenance to meet her needs and those of any children. The quantum of maintenance was not interfered with. (Paras 2-10)
C) Criminal Procedure Code - Revision - Maintainability - Section 397, CrPC - The revision against the order under the Domestic Violence Act is maintainable, but the court found no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of the courts below. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the wife is entitled to maintenance and right to reside in the shared household under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and whether the husband's revision against the order granting such relief is maintainable.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision application, upholding the orders of the courts below granting maintenance and right to residence to the wife under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Law Points
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- 2005
- Section 12
- Section 17
- Section 19
- Section 20
- Section 22
- Right to reside in shared household
- Maintenance
- Domestic relationship
- Shared household
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (07) 237
Criminal Revision Application No. 47 of 2015
Shri S.S. Kantak, Senior Advocate with Shri Preetam Talaulikar for Petitioner; Shri M.S. Khandeparkar for Respondent
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision application challenging the order granting maintenance and right to residence under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (husband) sought to set aside the order dated 09.01.2015 passed by the JMFC, Vasco-da-Gama, and the judgment dated 22.05.2015 of the Sessions Judge, Margao, which confirmed the order granting reliefs to the wife.
Filing Reason
The husband challenged the order granting maintenance and right to residence to the wife under the Domestic Violence Act, claiming the property was not a shared household and the wife was not entitled to maintenance.
Previous Decisions
The JMFC, Vasco-da-Gama, by order dated 09.01.2015, rejected the husband's application (Exhibit-10) and granted reliefs to the wife. The Sessions Judge, Margao, by judgment dated 22.05.2015 in Criminal Appeal No. 5/2015, confirmed the Magistrate's order.
Issues
Whether the wife is entitled to maintenance and right to reside in the shared household under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005?
Whether the revision application is maintainable and whether there are grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the property in question is not a shared household and the wife is not entitled to maintenance as she is capable of earning.
The respondent argued that she has a right to reside in the matrimonial home and is entitled to maintenance under the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The wife has a right to reside in the shared household under Section 17 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and is entitled to maintenance under Section 20. The concurrent findings of the courts below were not perverse or illegal, and no interference was warranted in revision.
Judgment Excerpts
By this revision application, the petitioner is challenging the judgment and order dated 22.05.2015, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Margao, in Criminal Appeal No. 5/2015.
The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the criminal revision may be stated thus: That the parties are husband and wife.
The present dispute arises out of an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, filed by the respondent before the learned Magistrate, for various reliefs under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the Act of 2005.
Procedural History
The wife filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, before the JMFC, Vasco-da-Gama, seeking reliefs. The Magistrate passed an order on 09.01.2015 granting reliefs. The husband filed an application (Exhibit-10) which was rejected. The husband appealed to the Sessions Judge, Margao, in Criminal Appeal No. 5/2015, which was dismissed on 22.05.2015. The husband then filed the present criminal revision application before the High Court of Bombay at Goa.
Acts & Sections
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22
- Indian Penal Code: 498-A
- Dowry Prohibition Act: 4
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 397
