[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Bhagyashri Vishal Deshmukh vs Vishal S/O Ghanshyam Deshmukh on 7 January, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:215
Order 070126wp823.25
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 823 OF 2025.
Bhagyashri Vishal Deshmukh and others.
-VERSUS-
Vishal Ghanshyam Deshmukh and others.
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
Shri V.N. Morande, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Shri S.G. Karmarkar, Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE : JANUARY 07, 2026.
Heard.
2. The petitioner is challenging the order dated
09.01.2025 passed below Exh.5 in P.W.D.V. Case No.1/2024,
by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gadchiroli, as
also the judgment and order dated 01.04.2025 in
P.W.D.V.A.No.3/2025 by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Gadchiroli.
3. It appears that the marriage between the petitioner
No.1 and respondent No.1 took place on 19.12.2019. It was a
Rgd.
Order 070126wp823.25
second marriage for the applicant no.1, out of the said
wedlock, two daughters were born - first in April 2020 and
second in April 2023. However, there arose a rift between the
parties, pursuant to which Domestic Violence proceedings
under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act was filed by the
petitioner no.1 - wife. An application under Section 23 of the
said Act, was also filed seeking grant of interim maintenance
and for protection of residence. This application came to be
rejected by the trial Court vide order dated 09.01.2025. Even
the revision filed was dismissed vide order dated 01.04.2025,
hence this petition.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners
submits that there is ample evidence on record to show that the
marriage had taken place between the applicant no.1 and
respondent no.1, and out of said wedlock, two daughters are
born. Birth certificates of both daughters are also placed on
record wherein in the column of father's name, name of
respondent no.1 appears. He further submits that when family
planning operation was conducted, and in the said papers,
name of respondent no.1 is shown as husband of applicant
Rgd.
Order 070126wp823.25
no.1. He therefore, submits that there is relationship in the
nature of marriage between the parties and thus, section 3 of
the D.V. Act would get attracted, however, when the interim
application under Section 23 was decided by the trial Court,
instead of considering the prima facie case, the Court below
went on to consider the validity of marriage. He further argued
that infact definition of Section 2[f] of the D.V. Act which
defines domestic relationship, includes a relationship in the
nature of marriage. He lastly submitted that the learned trial
Court has given a go-bye to other evidence also and thereby
committed gross error.
5. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing
for respondents submitted that admittedly the trial Court has
not considered other documentary evidence, and therefore,
requests to remand the matter for fresh consideration.
6. After considering the rival submissions of the
parties, it appears that there is ample evidence on record. The
Court below ought not to have considered the impact of
validity of marriage while deciding the interim application.
The Court below ought to have seen the documentary evidence
Rgd.
Order 070126wp823.25
which is placed on record by the petitioners, prior to recording
a finding declining grant of interim maintenance. The trial
Court has ignored all these aspects and has arrived at a wrong
conclusion. Unless and until evidence is led by the parties, it is
very difficult to consider the rival submissions of the parties.
Therefore, considering this fact, I am of the opinion that a case
for remand is made out by the petitioners. The impugned
orders dated 09.01.2025 and 01.04.2025 are accordingly
quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the trial
Court with a direction to decide the same afresh by considering
the other documentary evidence placed on record. The learned
Counsel for the respondents submits that he will also place
affidavit in respect of assets and liabilities on record, which he
is permitted to do so.
7. At this juncture, the learned Counsel for petitioners
submits that till the interim application is decided, some
provisional arrangement for maintenance must be made.
8. Considering the fact which has surfaced on record,
I am of the view that some monetary benefit is required to be
given to the petitioner -wife, considering the fact that two
Rgd.
Order 070126wp823.25
daughters are also living with her. Hence, an amount of
Rs.5000/- per month is granted to them as interim
arrangement which would be payable by the respondent no.1
from this month, till the decision is arrived on the interim
application by the trial Court.
9. Criminal Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of
with above directions.
JUDGE
Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD)
Designation:Rgd.
PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 08/01/2026 18:40:08
