Bangalore District Court
Shivakumar Angadi vs Mangla Pujar on 1 July, 2025
KABC010228512024
IN THE COURT OF LXVII ADDL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE; BENGALURU CITY (CCH.No.68)
PRESENT
SMT.RASHMI.M.
BA.LL.B., LL.M.
LXVII ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU.
Dated this the 1st day of July 2025.
Crl. Appeal No.1457/2024
APPELLANT : Sri.Shivakumar Angadi,
S/o.Kiran Angadi,
Aged about 38 years,
R/at.No.4/1/18, 1st Cross,
Veeranna Garden,
Hennur,
Kalyan Nagar Post,
Bengaluru North,
Bengaluru.
Represented by his G.P.A.Holder
Sri.Kiran Angadi.
(By Sri.M.G.V., Advocate)
.Vs.
RESPONDENT : Smt.Mangala Pujar,
D/o.Late Shankarappa Pujar,
Aged about 38 years,
R/at.No.9, 2nd Floor,
12th Cross, 2nd Main,
Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024
2
Vijayanagar,
Bengaluru.
(By Sri.S.S., Advocate)
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the appellant challenging the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-V, Bengaluru in Crl.Misc.No.69/2024, dated:30.08.2024 as to the issuance of FLW and NBW to the appellant and to direct the trial court to consider the stay order passed by this court on 12.08.2024 and to direct the trial court not to issue FLW and NBW to the appellant.
2. The appellant herein was the respondent No.1 and respondent was the petitioner before the trial court. For the sake of convenience, parties would be referred to by the ranks they were assigned before the trial court.
3. Brief facts of the case of the petitioner are as under:
The marriage of the petitioner and respondent No.1 was solemnized on 31.07.2022 at Hotel Ajantha, Bengaluru. Due to serious ill-treatment by the respondent and his family members, the petitioner is forcibly shifted to her parental house at Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Thereafter the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 12 of PWDV Act in Crl.Misc.No.5/2023 Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 3 along with I.A.Nos.1 and 2 for interim maintenance of Rs.2,00,000/- per month and to secure 2 bed room house in Bengaluru or to direct the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- per month as rental expenses respectively, till disposal of the petition.
The appellant herein had filed I.A.No.5 seeking discharge, but the trial court vide its order dated:5.02.2024 has rejected the said I.A.No.5. In the said order, the trial court without applying its judicial mind and without any enquiry and without giving the appellant sufficient opportunity to file his affidavit of Assets & Liabilities affidavitand without appreciating the material documents produced by him has blindly passed the order. The appellant's father paid Rs.25,000/- before the trial court and the appellant paid through Geogle Pay of Rs.2,00,000/- to the respondent in the open court in Crl. Appeal No.425/2024. Further this court vide its order dated:12.08.2024 in Crl. Appeal No.425/2024 has granted stay till further order. But the learned Magistrate without considering the stay order, had tried to issuance of FLW and NBW to the appellant in the next date of hearing i.e., on 5.09.2024.
4. The appellant/respondent has preferred this appeal on the following grounds :
It is contended that the impugned order passed by the trial court with respect of issuance of FLW and NEW Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 4 to the appellant in Crl.Misc.No.69/2024 is illegal, contrary to law and evidence. The learned Magistrate without considering the stay order passed by the learned Sessions Court in Crl. Appeal No.425/2024 has issued the FLW and NBW to the appellant. The appellant had paid 50% of the total due amount of interim maintenance to the respondent and the trial court without consider the stay order dated:12.08.2024, had issued FLW and NBW to the appellant. Even though the Sessions Court had granted stay order till further orders on 12.08.2024, the learned Magistrate without application of mind and without obeying the orders of the Sessions Court has issued the FLW and NBW to the appellant. The GPA holder paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- deposited before the trial court and issued an FLW and NBW to the GPA holder was liable to be set aside. Hence prayed to allow the appeal.
5. The respondent has filed objections contending that the application filed by the appellant for stay of the execution and operation of the order dated:30.08.2024 passed in Crl. Misc.No.69/2024 passed by the trial court is not maintainable in the eye of law. The trial court has passed the order of maintenance of Rs.46,000/- to the respondent by the appellant only after hearing both the sides. That the appellant is a Doctor in profession and working at Israel. After the marriage the Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 5 respondent came to know about the impotency of the appellant. By suppressing the said fact, the appellants have arranged the marriage. This is the second marriage of the appellant. The first marriage was also ended with divorce on mutual consent for the very same reason. The respondent is aged about 38 years and it is her first marriage. Because of the fraud committed by the appellant and his parents, she is leading to miserable life. Further it is the bounded duty of the husband to maintain his legally wedded wife. Admitted the appellant is a Doctor and earning more than Rs.10,00,000/- per month. Before the trial court, even after giving sufficient opportunity, the appellant has not furnished the Assets & Liabilities Affidavit. If he has filed the Assets and Liabilities before the trial court, he would have granted more interim maintenance to the respondent. The trial court has passed lesser maintenance amount compared to the avocation and earnings of the appellant. Hence the respondent has filed an appeal for enhancement of maintenance amount in Crl. Appeal No.1063/2024, which is pending consideration. The appellant has filed Crl. Appeal No.425/2024 and the court has granted the conditional order that the appellant has to pay the monthly maintenance of Rs.30,000/-. According to the said order, the arrears of maintenance is Rs.6,60,000/- till date. However, the appellant has paid only Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 6 Rs.2,00,000/- to the respondent and Rs.25,000/- was deposited in the trial court. As on the date i.e., on 30.08.2024, the trial court has directed the appellant to pay arrears of maintenance amount, but the appellant has twisted the order and by misleading the court has obtained the stay order for Crl.Misc.No.69/2024. Though the appellant has knowledge about the order in question has not paid the maintenance amount and he is not given respect to the court order and hence the application is liable to be dismissed.
6. Heard.
7. The points raised for consideration are as under:
1. Whether the appellant/respondent has made out sufficient grounds by interfering with the impugned order passed by the trial court as to issuance of FLW and NBW though the stay order is pending ?
2. What Order ?
8. My findings to the above points are:
POINT No.1 : Affirmative, POINT No.2 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
9. POINT No.1:- I have considered the appeal averments along with objections and the documents Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 7 placed before the court and the arguments addressed by both the sides.
10. It is the specific contention of the appellant/husband that the trial court without giving him an opportunity to file his affidavit of Assets & Liabilities and without appreciating the documents produced by the appellant, has blindly passed the order on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 directing him to pay interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month to the petitioner/wife from the date of petition till further orders. The father of the appellant had paid Rs.25,000/- and he had transferred Rs.2,00,000/- to the respondent in the open court in Crl. Appeal No.425/2024 and the stay order was granted till further orders in Crl. Appeal No.425/2024. The trial court without considering the stay order dated:12.08.2024 had issued F.L.W., and N.B.W., to the appellant/husband on 5.09.2024. Having been aggrieved by the said order, he had preferred the present appeal.
11. The respondent/wife has filed detailed objections stating that the appellant/husband has not made out grounds to the relief claimed. Hence prayed that the appeal be dismissed.
12. On considering the stand taken by both the sides, it is necessary to note that Crl. Appeal Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 8 No.425/2024 preferred by the appellant herein is pending for adjudication before this court. On perusal of the order sheet dated:27.03.2024 in Crl. Appeal No.425/2024, it is observed that " this court had stayed further operation and execution of the impugned order dated:5.02.2024 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-V, Bengaluru in Crl. Misc.No.5/2023 with a condition to pay interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month to the respondent/wife from the date of application till further orders. Issue Exparte order, notice of I.A.No.1 and appeal memo to the respondent by RPAD if P.F. paid, it was posted on 25.06.2024". On 25.06.2024 the learned advocate for respondent/wife has put up appearance. Thereafter on 8.08.2024 the appellant, respondent and their counsels were present. On the said date, the respondent/wife has received Rs.50,000/- cash and cheque for Rs.50,000/- in the open court and the same was endorsed by the respondent/wife and her counsel in the order sheet and the appeal was posted for further payment of Rs.1,00,000/- on 12.08.2024. On the said date i.e., on 12.08.2024, the respondent/wife has submitted to have received Rs.1,00,000/- through Geogle Pay. As such, the total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was being paid. In view of the payment made, it was noted that the stay has been granted till further orders.
Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 9
13. In view of the said order passed by this court, it clearly goes to show that this court has stayed further proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.5/2023 pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-V, Bengaluru. When that being so, the trial court has observed in the order sheet dated:30.08.2024 i.e., after the appellant/husband made payment of total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards maintenance had stayed further proceedings in Crl. Misc.No.5/2023, which is the main D.V.Act petition in which the maintenance and interim order was passed by the trial court. But, the respondent/wife had filed Crl.Misc.No.69/2024 arising out of Crl. Misc.No.5/2023 for recovery of maintenance. When that being so, on 30.08.2024 even though the learned advocate for the appellant herein had furnished the photo copy of the order passed by the court in Crl. Appeal No.425/2024 dated:12.08.2023, wherein further proceedings was stayed. But the learned Magistrate has wrongly made observation that there is no stay to Crl. Misc.No.69/2024, which was then pending before CCH No.57 (it was thereafter transferred to this court). Even though it was brought to the knowledge of the learned Magistrate that the execution and further proceedings in Crl. Misc.No.5/2023 has been stayed, but has proceeded to issue FLW and NBW to the respondent herein, as no stay was granted by CCH No.57 i.e., without considering the stay of the proceedings granted Crl.Appeal No.1457/2024 10 by this court. Hence, it can be safely said that the appellant/husband has made out grounds to set aside the order dated:30.08.2024 wherein issuance of FLW and NBW to the appellant/husband by the trial court in Crl.Misc.No.69/2024 was passed. Accordingly, I answer the Point No.1 in the Affirmative.
14. POINT No.2 : My finding on this point is as per following :
ORDER The Crl. Appeal filed by the appellant is hereby allowed. Consequently, the impugned order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-V, Bengaluru Crl.Misc.No.69/2024, dated:30.08.2024 as to issuance of FLW and NBW against the appellant herein is set aside.
Send the copy of this order to the trial court.
(Dictated to then Stenographer Grade-II directly on computer, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1 st day of July 2025) (RASHMI.M) LXVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, BENGALURU.Digitally signed by RASHMI M
RASHMI Date:
M 2025.07.04
16:35:54
+0530