Aneesha Dutt vs Ashu Dutt And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 7416 Bom

                               :1:             1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

             CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3709 OF 2022

 Ashu Dutt                                                ..... Petitioner
            Versus
 Aneesha Dutt
 and another                                              .... Respondents
                              .....
                             WITH
               INTERIM APPLICATION NO.120 OF 2023
                              IN
             CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3709 OF 2022

                        .....
                       WITH
    CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.468 OF 2022
                        .....
                       WITH
    CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.470 OF 2022

                           -----
 Mr. Rohan Cama, Advocate a/w. Ayushi Anandpara i/b.
 Sapana Rachure, for the Petitioner in WP/3709/2022 and
 for   Respondent     No.1      in   REVN/468/2022    &
 REVN/470/2022.

 Mr. Santosh Paul, Senior Advocate a/w. Mahir Bhatt,
 Maithreya Shetty i/b. Wasim Ansari for the Applicant in
 REVN/468/2022 & REVN/470/2022 and for the Respondent
 No.1 in WP/3709/2022.

 Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for the Respondent-State.
                               -----

                                     CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 26th JULY, 2023

1 of 10

Deshmane(PS)

:2: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

P.C. :

1. Criminal Writ Petition No.3709/2022 is filed by

the husband of the Respondent No.1; and Criminal Revision

Application Nos.468/2022 & 470/2022 are filed by the wife

against the Petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition

No.3709/2022. For the sake of convenience, the parties are

referred to as 'husband' and 'wife'.

2. Heard Shri Rohan Cama, learned counsel for the

Petitioner in WP/3709/2022 (for Respondent No.1 in REVN/

468/2022 & REVN/470/2022), Shri Santosh Paul, learned

Senior Counsel for the Applicant in REVN/468/2022 &

REVN/470/2022 (for the Respondent No.1 in

WP/3709/2022) and Shri A.R. Patil, learned APP for the

State.

3. The wife had filed the proceedings under the

provisions of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence

Act (for short, 'DV Act') vide C.C. No.340/DV/2017 before

the Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.

Learned Magistrate vide his judgment and order dated 2 of 10

:3: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

16.1.2021 disposed of the proceedings by recording the

following operative part of the order :

"i. The application is partly allowed. ii. The respondent no.1 is directed not to commit any domestic violence of any kind with the applicant in future. He shall restrain himself from filing any complaint against her and her relatives in future. iii. The respondent No.1 shall pay Rs.30,000/-

(Rupees Thirty Thousands) per month to the applicant and her child as maintenance and education expenses from the date of this order.

iv. The reliefs sought by applicant for F-1, Beach House, stridhan and compensation is rejected. She can approach appropriate forum for her said reliefs.

v. This order will not affect the amount of arrears if any standing against respondent No.1 consequential to the interim order passed earlier.

vi. Copy of this Judgment be given to both the parties, free of costs."

4. Both the parties, being aggrieved by that order,

preferred separate Appeals before the Court of Sessions at

Dindoshi, Mumbai. The wife preferred Criminal Appeal

3 of 10

:4: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

No.28/2021 and the husband preferred Criminal Appeal

No.77/2021. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dindoshi,

Mumbai vide his common order dated 10.8.2022 passed the

following order :

"1. Criminal Appeal No.28 of 2021 is partly allowed and amount of maintenance is enhanced from Rs.30,000/- p.m. to Rs.75,000/- p.m.

2. Criminal Appeal No.77 of 2021 is partly allowed and the order of Ld. Trial Court restraining the husband from filing any complaint against wife and her relatives stands set aside.

3. Rest of the order in the impugned Judgment is maintained.

4. Original Judgment & order be kept in Criminal Appeal No.28 of 2021 & its true copy in Criminal Appeal No.77 of 2021.

5. R & P be sent to Lower Court."

5. Again, both the parties being aggrieved by the

modification of the order of the Magistrate by learned

Additional Sessions Judge, preferred these proceedings

before this Court.

4 of 10

:5: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

6. The brief submissions broadly made by both the

parties are as follows.

7. Learned counsel Shri Rohan Cama on behalf of

the husband, made following submissions:

i. There was delay in filing the domestic violence

complaint. The last incident was in the year 2012; and

the complaint proceedings were filed under the DV Act

in the year 2017.

ii. There was no allegation of any physical or economic

abuse. The allegations regarding mental harassment

are vague and are made with malafide intentions.

iii. The husband has meager income compared to the wife

who has considerable income.

iv. There was suppression of material facts by the wife.

v. He further submitted that learned Additional Sessions

Judge has not referred to any of the documents which

5 of 10

:6: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

were tendered in evidence in respect of the income of

the parties; and yet, arrived at the figure of

maintenance arbitrarily.

8. Learned Senior counsel Shri Santosh Paul on

behalf of the wife made the following submissions :

i. According to him, the husband is son of an IPC officer

and by using his clout, was continuously harassing the

wife by making various complaints.

ii. There were many FIRs lodged against the wife; and in

Mumbai, in three FIRs, B-Summary Reports were

submitted mentioning that the FIRs were false.

iii. On one occasion, the wife was brought back even after

crossing the barrier of Customs & Immigration when

she was about to board a flight with her three children.

iv. Both the Courts did not give any relief as far as the

Stridhan was concerned. According to learned Senior

Counsel, it is a settled law that the Stridhan which she

gets before and after the marriage is her own property 6 of 10

:7: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

and as a natural consequence, the Stridhan should

have been returned to her.

v. He submitted that there was no delay in filing the DV

proceedings because she was fighting all the FIRs and

all the proceedings against her and she was trying to

get back her Stridhan.

vi. He submitted that she does not have income on her

own but she is entirely dependent on her father who is

suffering from cancer and other serious ailments.

vii. He further submitted that the custody of two of her

children was taken away by deceit and only third

youngest son is now in her custody. The wife's parents

are spending considerable amount for his education.

9. I have considered these submissions. I have also

perused the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge.

The order does not show that the record about the income of

the parties was perused or considered by the Sessions Court.

Therefore, the figure mentioned in his operative part will

7 of 10

:8: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

have to be considered based on the record of the case.

Learned Judge's observation about Stridhan being part of the

appeal proceedings in the matrimonial matter, needs

consideration because according to learned counsel for the

wife the Stridhan was never a part of the matrimonial

proceedings and hence is not part of the Appeal proceedings.

Therefore, learned Judge should have considered the

question of returning the Stridhan independently based on

the evidence before him.

10. Considering all these submissions and the

reasons mentioned by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

both the parties have made out a case for admission of their

matters. These matters require consideration and also

perusal of the record and proceedings. Therefore, I am

inclined to admit these matters. The question is about the

interim relief. To that, Shri Cama submitted that without

prejudice to the rights and contentions of the husband, for

the next three months, by way of interim arrangement; the

husband shall deposit Rs.75,000/- directly in the account of

8 of 10

:9: 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

the wife. The submission is reasonable. Therefore, I am

inclined to take this submission into account for

consideration of the interim relief. By way of interim relief,

the order passed by the Sessions Court is required to be

stayed. Learned Senior Counsel for the wife submitted that

the husband be directed to clear the arrears.

11. Hence, the following order:

:: O R D E R ::

i. Rule is issued in Criminal Writ Petition No.3709/2022.

ii. Criminal Revision Application Nos.468/2022 & 470/2022 are admitted.

iii.     R & P be called.

iv.      Rule is made returnable on 26.10.2023.

v.       The husband shall clear the arrears as per the order
         passed        by       learned      Magistrate       in     the      original
         proceedings.

vi.      By way of interim arrangement, the husband shall

deposit Rs.75,000/- for the month of August 2023, Rs.75,000/- for the month of September 2023 and Rs.75,000/- for the month of October 2023 in the wife's account.

9 of 10

: 10 : 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

vii. On this condition, there shall be interim stay on the order dated 10.8.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge which is impugned in all these matters, till the next date.

viii.       Stand over to 26.10.2023.

ix.         If the matters are not heard and decided on the

scheduled date, then the parties are at liberty to file applications for appropriate interim reliefs.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Deshmane (PS)

10 of 10