The High Court of Chhattisgarh, held that the object of the D.V. Act of 2005 is to provide relief to an aggrieved woman who is subjected to domestic violence and falls within the ambit of an aggrieved person.
This ruling was made while allowing a criminal revision filed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge in a Criminal Appeal, which had stemmed from the decision of the learned Judicial Magistrate who dismissed the application for an allowance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Brief Facts:
The applicant filed an application under Section 29 before the Protection Officer of the Women and Child Development under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and sought relief under Sections 18, 19, 20, and 22 of the Act. The learned trial Court dismissed the application filed by the applicant holding that the domestic relationship and the domestic violence had not been proved. Being aggrieved with this order, the applicant preferred an appeal before the Additional Session Judge, which was also dismissed. Hence, the present application.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that for getting compensation under the D.V. Act of 2005, it is not required that the marriage should be proved and even otherwise, the proceeding under the grant of maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. or under this Act are summary in nature, therefore, no strict law of evidence or procedure law is applicable.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the impugned orders are legal, justified, and on the basis of appreciation of evidence material on the record that does not suffer from perversity and illegality which may warrant interference by this Court.
Observations of the court:
The court noted that the 2005 Act has been enacted with the object of ensuring a woman’s right to reside in her matrimonial home. This act has special features with special provisions under the law that provide protection to a woman to live in a violence-free home.
The Court observed that for grant of maintenance under the D.V. Act, marriage between the parties is not an essential condition, as against provisions under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., the object of the D.V. Act of 2005 is to provide relief to an aggrieved woman who is subjected to domestic violence and falls within the ambit of an aggrieved person. Therefore, the finding of the co-ordinate Bench that the marriage between the applicant and the respondent is void marriage does not have any bearing as under the D.V. Act of 2005 marriage is not a condition precedent for granting protection to an aggrieved person who may be a woman. The Court said that the proceedings of domestic violence are summary in nature.
The decision of the Court:
The Chhattisgarh High Court, allowing the appeal, held that the findings recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the appellate Court are perverse and contrary to the evidence.
Case Title: Smt. Manti Sahu vs. Mahesh Ganjir
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Case No.: CRR No. 82 of 2024
Advocate for the Applicant: Mrs. Manti Sahu
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Sudhir Verma
Picture Source :
