Bangalore District Court
Smt. Kajal K vs No.1 1. Sri.Kailash Jain on 5 March, 2020
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
TRAFFIC COURT-VI, BENGALURU CITY.
Crl.Mis.No.146/2017
Dated : This the 5th day of March 2020
Present : Smt. Triveni Iragar, M.Com, LL.B.,
Presiding Officer of M.M.T.C-VI
Petitioner : Smt. Kajal K
D/o Kiran Kumar Jain,
Aged about 21 years,
Address at No.1072/1,
1st Floor, PRS Lane,
Nagarathpet Cross,
Bangalore - 560 002.
V/s
Respondent No.1 1. Sri.Kailash Jain,
S/o Champalal,
Aged about 28 years,
2. Sri.Champalal,
Aged about 70 years.
3. Sri.Susheeladevi
W/o Champalal,
Aged about 65 years.
4. Sri. Manoj Lunia,
S/o Champalal.
2 Crl.Misc.146/2017
Respondent No.1 to 4
resident at No.1,
3rd Floor, Palliyappan Street,
Sowcarpet,
Chennai - 600 079.
JUDGMENT
The Petitioner has filed the present petition U/s 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking various relief's under the above said Act.
The brief facts of the petitioners' case are as under:
2. In the petition pleadings petitioner submits that six year back in the marriage of the petitioner's aunt Smt.Pushpa, at Shambavnath Bhavan, Bangalore the respondent No.1 introducing himself from the bride's side, asked for the mobile number of the petitioner.
Unsuspecting the petitioner gave her mobile number. The respondent No.1 begun to make late night calls and keep the petitioner disturbed. The petitioner tried to tell her parents, but fearing worst the petitioner did not tell anything about the disturbing of the respondent No.1. Whereas, the petitioner has taken the contention that on her birth day the respondent No.1 expressed his 3 Crl.Misc.146/2017 willingness to get marry her and even he has decided to inform his relationship with the petitioner to his parents. Further on 20.12.2016 the respondent took the petitioner to Sub-Registrar, Gandhinagar, Bangalore and told that, he would apply for registration of the marriage and it is mere application and for register it will take one month. On the same day they returned to their respective home, neither the petitioner nor the respondent informed anything to their parents. Further she take up contention that on 04.02.2017 the respondent made call to her and asked the petitioner to come near Pai Vihar Hotel, Near Sharadha Theater, OTC Road, Bangalore at 4.00 p.m. when the petitioner went to the place, the respondent No.1 had come there in car of Tamilnadu registration along with one lady by name Bhuvana and one of his staff named Dhaval Soni as they were introduced to the petitioner and respondent No.1 told that he has come to take the petitioner to Chennai and petitioner was surprised by the respondent words and petitioner did not liked going with respondent in that way. when she refused the respondent showed to her their marriage registration certificate and told that if she does not accompany the respondent No.1 he will go to her parents and disclose that the petitioner is his wife 4 Crl.Misc.146/2017 and that he would also seek police help in taking her to Chennai. Seeing their marriage certificate in the respondent she shocked and fearing to reaction of her parents for such her decision she agreed for co-operating with respondent, respondent his friends Bhuvana and Dhaval Soni took her first to Mumbai instead of Chennai there they stayed for 2 days, later on they went to Chennai, there they attended the respondent's cousin marriage and after that they returned to the Pune. Later on 05.02.2017 they returned to the respondent native on that respondent no2 and 3 asked respondent about the petitioner he introduced petitioner to his family members as his friend and she had come for tour and on their behind respondent convinced petitioner that he will disclose true fact of their marriage to their family member in a proper circumstance they stayed in Chennai for 3 months in respondent in a single room provided by the respondent no 1 family members. When petitioner felt that nothing has been done by the respondent to reveal about their marriage before family member and on 03.06.2017 respondent had asked her to return to her parents house on that whole day respondent was out of the house and on 04.06,2017 respondent called her over phone and directed the 5 Crl.Misc.146/2017 petitioner to return back to her father place and 4th respondent Mr Manoj brother of the respondent had dropped her at Chennai railway station and from there she returned back to the Bengaluru on 06.06.2017 all alone. After returning to the Bengaluru on 06.06.2017 she came to know that her father has lodged her absconding case. Further she takes the contention that the respondent at the guise get marry her he cheated and raped the petitioner under the false impression and even he has sexually exploited the petitioner. Hence, she prays to allow her petition. And pass orders under section 18 prohibiting the respondent No.1 from coming to her house, stalking her and creating nuisance, making calls to her mobile phone or sending any messages audio, video or others.
Monitory relief under section 20 of the P.W.D.V. Act direct in the respondent No.1 to 4 to pay expenses for food, clothing, medication and recurring necessities sum of Rs.50,000/- p.m. Compensation order No 22 of the P.W.D.V. Act sum of Rs.50,00,000/- for the sufferings of the domestic violence.
6 Crl.Misc.146/2017
3. After the registration of the petition this Court has issued notice to the respondents and they appeared through their counsel and filed objection to the main petition. Further in the objection statement respondent No.1 admits the marriage with the petitioner. Further they denies all the allegation made in the petition against the respondents as false. Further they states that they never ever caused domestic violence against the petitioner. Further respondent no1 has taken contention that he got married with the petitioner on 20.12.2016 as per Hindu rights in the Annamma Temple at Subhedar Chatram Road, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru-560009. And reception function was held at No.1, 3rd Floor, Palliyappan Street, Savkar Pet, Chennai on 20.12.2016 and he got registered his marriage on 20.12.2016 at sub- registrar office. Later on he took the petitioner to honeymoon to various places and also they had trips surrounding the Chennai, Puna, Rajasthan, Mumbai, Mount Abu even they also visited their community temple at Chennai to perform some of the marriage rituals. And later on without reason and without informing him the petitioner has left his house when he came to know about the petitioner not returning back he has filed conjugal Right petition under section 9 of Hindu 7 Crl.Misc.146/2017 Marriage Act at Chennai Court bearing OP No 2476/2017 dated 03.07.2017 further he has taken the contention that neither he has nor his family members have caused any domestic violence against the petitioner where as petitioner has filed petition before the Family Court bearing No 3300/2017 for decree for nullity of marriage on 01.07.2017 against the respondent. Hence, they prayed to reject the petition of the petitioner.
4. Heard both side. On the basis of above facts the points that would arise for consideration are as under:
1. Whether petitioner proves that she has been sexually exploited by the respondent?
2. Whether petitioner proves that she has been in Domestic Relationship with the respondents?
3. Whether the Petitioner proves that the respondents have been subjected petitioners to Domestic Violence?
4. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the relief/s sought for ?
5. If so to what extent?
6. What Order ?
5. The answers to the aforesaid points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Negative;
8 Crl.Misc.146/2017 Point No.2 : In the affirmative;
Point No.3 : In the Negative;
Point No.4 : In the Negative;
Point No.5 : In the Negative;
Point No.6 : As per final order for the following :
REASONS POINT NO.1 TO 5:
6. The petitioner has filed petition U/Sec.12 of the P.W.D.V. Act. In the petition pleadings petitioner has taken the contention that she born on 17.06.201996 and at present she is pursuing B.Com at Mahaveer Jain College, Bengaluru. Further she submits that six year back in the marriage of the petitioner's aunt Smt.Pushpa, at Shambavnath Bhavan, Bangalore the respondent No.1 introducing himself from the bride's side, asked for the mobile number of the petitioner. Unsuspecting the petitioner gave her mobile number. The respondent No.1 begun to make late night calls and keep the petitioner disturb the petitioner. The petitioner tried to tell her parents, but fearing worst the petitioner did not tell anything about the disturbing of the respondent 9 Crl.Misc.146/2017 No.1. Even on her 20th Birthday the respondent No.1 has brought cake and gift for the petitioner. This has been re-iterated by the petitioner in her affidavit. But in the objection filed by the respondent, the respondent has denied all these above explanation given by the petitioner.
7. Whereas, the petitioner has taken the contention that on her birth day the respondent No.1 expressed his willingness to get marry her and even he has decided to inform his relationship with the petitioner to his parents. Further the petitioner even then also she refused to get marry with him but he promised that he would be a good life partner, otherwise, he will end of his life. Further she take up contention that on 20.12.2016 the respondent took the petitioner to Sub-Registrar, Gandhinagar, Bangalore and told that, they will apply for registration of their marriage and it is mere application and for register it will take one month and during that month he will inform about the decision to his parents and also convince the petitioner's parents. On the same day returned to their respective home, neither the petitioner nor the respondent not informed any of their parents. Further she take up contention that on 10 Crl.Misc.146/2017 04.02.2017 the respondent made call to her and asked the petitioner to come near Pai Vihar Hotel, Near Sharadha Theater, OTC Road, Bangalore at 4.00 p.m. when the petitioner went to the place, the respondent No.1 had come there in car of Tamilnadu registration along with one lady by name Bhuvana and one of his staff named Dhaval Soni as they were introduced to the petitioner and respondent No.1 told that he has come to take the petitioner to Chennai and petitioner was surprised by the respondent words and petitioner did not liked going that way and the respondent when she resisted he told that if she does not accompany the respondent No.1 he would go to her parents and disclose that the petitioner is his wife and that he would also seek police help for taking her to Chennai.
8. Further she takes contention that respondent No.1 did not permitted her to use her mobile phone and it was forcibly switched off for 4 days the respondent No.1 kept the petitioner in Mumbai where she was taken to instead of Chennai. under the guise of saying that his cousins marriage is being performed their from their petitioner was taken to Rajasthan and stayed there for about 8 days. From there the petitioner was taken to 11 Crl.Misc.146/2017 Pune, Maharastra and stayed for a day in the house of the respondent friend by name Mr. Madhu from Pune the petitioner was taken to the Chennai to the house of the respondents. This is all about 02.04.2017 on that day the respondent No 2 and 3 inquired about the petitioner the respondent told them that petitioner his friend she has come to Chennai for tour the respondent parents did not object to the respondent staying with the petitioner. The petitioner was told by the respondent No 1 that he will find a suitable time to talk to his parents about making the relationship with the petitioner. The respondent No 1 did not do any such thing and kept the petitioner in his house for 3 months. The petitioner did not find anything happened from the respondents regarding the marriage and seems to be a ploy from the respondent to use the petitioner on 03.06.2017 respondent left his house telling that the petitioner should return to her parents the whole of the night of the 03.06.2017 the respondent was away and did not come home. On 04.06.2017 the respondent again called the petitioner and asked her to live the house. The respondent No.4 Mr. Manoj younger brother dropped her at Chennai railway station on 04.06.2017 from there is all alone returned to the Bengaluru from Chennai. On 12 Crl.Misc.146/2017 06.06.2017 she came to know that her father has lodged her absconding case. Further she takes the contention that the respondent at the guise of getting marrying her he cheated her with ought marrying her and raped her under the false impression and even he has sexually exploited her.
9. Whereas, the respondent has taken the contention that on 28.12.2016 he got married with the petitioner but when the petitioner was not ready to join him in matrimonial home and he informed the petitioner that he will convince her parents join the respondent, believing her words the very marriage day he dropped the petitioner to her parents house. He deposed that it is true that marriage has been solemnized between them. Even the petitioner herself has also produced her marriage certificate which is marked as Ex.P.1. Event he respondent counsel has furnished marriage photo to the petitioner, wherein, the petitioner and respondent both are garlanding each order and on confronting this documents the petitioner has replied in the cross examination that the said photo was taken by the respondent at Annamma Temple and it has been taken by the respondent by forcing her. But looking to the 13 Crl.Misc.146/2017 photo it does not shows that the respondent has taken this photo forcing petitioner.
10. Further even in the cross examination the respondent has admitted that in the marriage registration certificate photo has been scanned in that photo the petitioner is not wearing any Mangalya on her neck, for that the respondent has given reason that prior going to the registration office they both had took that photo and gave it at registrar office for the marriage registration.
11. Where as the petitioner and her counsel has taken the contention that respondent had not got married with the petitioner and the marriage certificate is fake and even petitioner was intimated by the respondent on 20.12.2017 that they are merely applying for the marriage registration it does not mean that their marriage got registered it will take one month period t get registered.
12. At this stage we have to go through the definition of marriage registration definition as per the Hindu marriage registration act 1955.
14 Crl.Misc.146/2017
13. In one of the very popular judgment under P.W.D.V. Act that is Indira sarma vs V.K.V. Sarma at para 29 it has been mentioned that marriage under Hindu custom means all below ceremonies should be carried out those are.
''7. Ceremonies for a Hindu marriage:-
(1) A Hindu marriage may be solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either party thereto.
(2) Where such rites and ceremonies include the saptapadi (that is, the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom and the bride jointly before the scared fire), the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh steps is taken.'' The Hindu Marriage Act is applicable in cases where both husband and wife are Hindus, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs, or where they have converted into any of these religions.
14. Apart from this for getting a marriage should be registered as per the registration act 1955 the following steps to be followed.
15 Crl.Misc.146/2017
15. The first step in this marriage registration process is to apply to the sub-registrar under whose jurisdiction the marriage has been solemnized, or either party to the marriage has been residing.
16. Both partners will need to fill in the application Form, sign it and submit it along with two photographs of the marriage ceremonies, invitation card of the marriage, age and address proof of both parties, Affidavit of Notary/Executive Magistrate under the Hindu Marriage Act 1995, fit mental condition and proof of non- relationship between the parties within the degree of prohibition.
17. All the documents should be attested by a Gazetted Officer and the parties will have to deposit a fee with the cashier at the sub-registrar and attach the receipt with the Application Form. Once the application has been submitted and the documents verified, the concerned officer will assign a date of registration when the marriage certificate document will be issued.
18. Based on this definition and comparing to the fact explained by the petitioner that petitioner herself and respondent went to sub register office on 20.12.2016 16 Crl.Misc.146/2017 applied for their marriage registration by furnishing necessary documents.
19. As per the rule and comparing the date of application moved by both the respondent and petitioner their marriage got registered after one month petitioner and respondent marriage got registered knowing fully well about marriage registration and co-operating with the respondent for their marriage registration petitioner taking wrong contention that their marriage is not registered and respondent committed fraud on her registering their marriage and obtaining their marriage certificate because none of the sub register office will not register any marriage unless necessary documents furnished by the both the husband and wife and full filling all the condition of the marriage registration rule.
20. Denying their marriage petitioner herself has produced her marriage certificate which is marked as Exhibit.P-1, thereby the marriage is proved by the petitioner indirectly.
21. Thereby the marriage of the petitioner and respondent is proved and it is also proved by the 17 Crl.Misc.146/2017 respondent that, the marriage was solemnized on 26.06.2016. Hence marriage is not in dispute. At this stage we have consider that whether petitioner is a aggrieved person and she was in domestic relationship with the respondent in shared household'.
22. Shared house hold'' means where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage has lived in domestic relationship. Either signally or along with the respondent and includes such a house hold whether owned or tenanted either jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent or owned or tenanted by either of them in respect of which either the aggrieved person or the respondent or both jointly or signally have any right, title, interest or equity or includes such a house hold which may belong to the joint family of which the respondent is a member, irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right title or interest in the share house hold.
23. As per the definition mentioned in the PWDV Act, Section 2 (A) "aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been in domestic relationship with 18 Crl.Misc.146/2017 the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent.
24. Section 2 (F) ''domestic relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared house hold when they are related by consanguinity, marriage or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family.
25. Petitioner has explained in her petition pleadings that after their marriage registration certificate obtained by the respondent on Further she takes contention that respondent No.1 did not permitted her to use her mobile phone and it was forcibly switched off for 4 days the respondent No.1 kept the petitioner in Mumbai where she was taken to instead of Chennai. In the guise of saying that his cousins marriage is being performed their from their petitioner was taken to Rajasthan and stayed there for about 8 days. From there the petitioner was taken to Pune, Maharastra and stayed for a day in the house of the respondent's friend by name Mr. Madhu from Pune the petitioner was taken to the 19 Crl.Misc.146/2017 Chennai to the house of the respondents. This is all about 02.05.2017 on that day the respondent No 2 and 3 inquired about the petitioner the respondent told them that petitioner his friend she has come to Chennai for tour the respondent parents did not object to the respondent staying with the petitioner. The petitioner was told by the respondent No 1 that he will find a suitable time to talk his parents about making the relationship with the petitioner. The respondent No 1 did not do any such thing and kept the petitioner in his house for 3 months. The petitioner did not find anything happened from the respondents regarding the marriage and seems to be a ploy from the respondent to use the petitioner on 03.06.2017 respondent left his house telling that the petitioner should return to her parents the whole of the night of the 03.06.2017 the respondent was away and did not come home. On 04.06.2017 the respondent again called the petitioner and asked her to live the house. The respondent No.4 Mr. Manoj younger brother of the respondent dropped the petitioner to the railway station and asked her to return to the Bangalore.
26. Further she takes contention that respondent No.1 did not permitted her to use her mobile phone and 20 Crl.Misc.146/2017 it was forcibly switched off for 4 days the respondent No.1 kept the petitioner in Mumbai where she was taken to instead of Chennai. In the guise of saying that his cousins marriage is being performed their from their petitioner was taken to Rajasthan and stayed there for about 8 days. From there the petitioner was taken to Pune, Maharastra and stayed for a day in the house of the respondent friend by name Mr. Madhu from Pune the petitioner was taken to the Chennai to the house of the respondents. This is all about 02.05.2017 on that day the respondent No 2 and 3 inquired about the petitioner the respondent told them that petitioner his friend she has come to chennai for tour the respondent parents did not object to the respondent staying with the petitioner. The petitioner was told by the respondent No 1 that he will find a suitable time to talk his parents about making the relationship with the petitioner. The respondent No 1 did not do any such thing and kept the petitioner in his house for 3 months. The petitioner did not find anything happened from the respondents regarding the marriage and seems to be a ploy from the respondent to use the petitioner on 03.06.2017 respondent left his house telling that the petitioner should return to her parents the whole of the night of the 03.06.2017 the respondent was 21 Crl.Misc.146/2017 away and did not come home. On 04.06.2017 the respondent again called the petitioner and asked her to live the house. The respondent No.4 Mr. Manoj younger brother left her at railway station of Chennai and she came all alone to the Bengaluru from Chennai her stay with respondent at Chennai for 3 months at respondent residence is not denied by the respondent. There by the petitioner has proved the she is legally wadded wife of the respondent and her relationship by marriage and she stayed in shared house hold it is not denied by the respondent. Further she has taken contention that she has been sexually exploited by the respondent for that she taken the contention that
27. In Rajastan respondent introduced her as friend to the respondent No.2 and 3. Even the petitioner has given reply that from 04.02.2017 till she reaches to Chennai she had opportunity to inform about her traveling to Chennai, even she did not informed whereabouts her to any of the relatives. Further she take up contention that after reaching to the Chennai the respondent had sex with her from 18.02.2017 to 04.06.2017 continuously and it was forcibly, even she has taken the contention that the respondent No.2 and 3 22 Crl.Misc.146/2017 be present in the same house and they have not restricted the respondent to have sex with the petitioner who is unknown girl to that family. Thereby she takes the contention that even the respondent no.2 to 3 have also caused mental and abuse against her by supporting the respondent to exploiting her physically, but with respect to that she has not produced any documents and she takes contention that respondent raped her and sexually exploited her for that we have to look into the definition of the Rape defined in the Indian penal code Section 375.Rape.- means it is said to be commit ''rape'' if he-
(a) Penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman of makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(b) inerts, to any extent, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the vagina, the urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(c) manipulates her to do so with the body of a woman so as to cause penetration into the vagina, urethra, anus or any part of the body of such woman or makes her to do so with or any other person; or
23 Crl.Misc.146/2017
(d) applies his mouth the vagina, anus, urethra of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person, under the circumstances falling under any of the following seven descriptions:-
First- Against her will.
Secondly- Without her consent.
Thirdly- With her consent when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested, in fear of death or of hurt.
Fourthly- With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
Fifthly- With her consent when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequence of that which she gives consent.
24 Crl.Misc.146/2017 Sixthly- With or without her consent, when she is under eighteen years of age.
Seventhly- When she is unable to communicate consent.
Provided that a woman who does not physically resist to the act of penetration shall not by the reason only of that fact, be regarded as consenting to the sexual activity.
Exception 1. A medical procedure or intervention shall not constitute rape.
Exception 2. Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own life, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.
28. On going through the definition of Rape the sexual assaulted by the respondent is not done by the respondent in isolated place nor the petitioner was unknown to the respondent nor respondent was stranger to the petitioner and petitioner is legal wedded wife o the respondent having co habitation with his own wife is not amounts to Rape and in this case both petitioner and 25 Crl.Misc.146/2017 respondent are husband and wife as per exhibit P1 and R1.
29. Even she has taken the contention that till 04.06.2017 she stayed in the respondent's house, it was not known to her parents and one day prior to her reaching to the Bengaluru she has informed her father whereabouts her. Whereas, in the cross examination she has taken the contention that in the month of February she went to Chennai, there she stayed 3 months. During that 3 months she visited Mount Abu, it is in Madhya Pradesh and also she visited her Family goddess temple. Even she admits that in all the places of the Rajastan, respondent took her with love and affection. Even she has admits that the respondent has not misbehaved with her in Rajastan and Mumbai. Only once she had fight with the petitioner in Rajastan. With that respect also she has not filed complaint against the respondent. Further she admits that on 02.03.2017 she had been to Chennai along with the respondent and from Rajastan directly went to the Pune, there she stayed for one day and Pune to Chennai they went in the car and there they took 1 ½ days travel and on 02.03.2017 and 03.03.2017 she was stayed in Chennai. During those days the 26 Crl.Misc.146/2017 respondent used to stayed some time and he goes out some time. Further petitioner admits that when the respondent stayed out of the house for work she used to stay along with respondent's parents, even she admits that the respondent's parents were age old and they are having above 70 yeas and she is also admits that the respondent's brother also doing work and all the family got cloth business and respondent's brother living to the work in early morning and return back at late night.
30. Even she admits that she saw the respondent's house at Channai and it is rented house. Even she admits that there one separate room was allotted to her and she admits that the respondent introduced herself to the family members as friend and she has not introducing objecting the respondent that she is wife of the respondent. Even she also admits that the respondent's parents have looked after her very well and also respondent's brother behaved properly with her.
31. Further she took up contention that whereabouts her information to her parents it was brought to their knowledge only one day prior to she returning to the Bengaluru i.e., on 03.06.2017, when the 27 Crl.Misc.146/2017 respondent himself asked her to leave Rajastan and return back to the Bengaluru and on 04.06.2017 she was dropped by the respondent's brother to Railway Station and from Rajastan to Bengaluru she traveled alone in Train. With respect to her wellbeing is not given by her father, to that aspect she has been cross examined. In the cross examination she has taken contention that her one of the relatives lives at Rajastan in 100 feet walk able distance from the respondent's house and even one of her Sister-In-Law's house is there near to temple of their family goddess. Petitioner also admits that she went to Mount Abue to meet the respondent's sister by name Santhoshi and also she admits that she know one more sister of the respondent who is daughter of respondent No.2 by name Veena. That particular Veena is accompanied her all the days whenever she visit market. In such occasions also petitioner has not made any effort to inform to her situation to her relatives and she admitted in her cross examination she was not confined by the respondent at any point of time to prove that she enjoyed her days at Chennai with the respondent has produced 13 photo graphs of their visit to various places which are marked as exhibit R.3, in all those photos petitioner is happy 28 Crl.Misc.146/2017 with the respondent and she enjoyed her stay of 3 months at Chennai even she admitted it in her cross examination.
32. Thereby it clearly shows that the petitioner has went along with the respondent on her own interest and there is no question of absconding, only the petitioner has concealed fact from her parents. Even the petitioner has enjoyed her marital life with the respondent No.1 at Rajastan for 4 months and there is no any such suffer from the respondent and respondent has not cheated the petitioner. With respect o the petitioner's enjoyment with him in the Rajastan days, the respondent No1. has produced 13 photos which are marked as Ex.R.3, apart from 13 photos one photo has been confronted to the petitioner which is Ex.R.3 and Ex.R.3(A). IN Ex.R.3(a) one of the friend of the both the petitioner and respondent by name Bhuvana is present and in all the photos the petitioner is cordial with the respondent and she was happy with the respondent.
33. With respect to that even when the petitioner returned back to parents house she refused to join the respondent, the respondent has lodged conjugal right 29 Crl.Misc.146/2017 petition against the petitioner before the Chennai, Family Court and certified copy of the conjugal right petition filed by the petitioner which is marked as Ex.P.2 and very said petition has been filed by the respondent on 3.07.2017 i.e., very next month of the petitioner left the matrimonial home. Further in counter the petitioner has filed petition seeking decree of nullity of their marriage against the respondent before the Bengaluru Family Court which is registered by the petitioner on 01.07.2017. The certified copy of the petition filed by the petitioner seeking decree of nullity of their marriage is produced by the petitioner which is marked as Ex.P.3. Even she has produced FIR copy of the complaint lodged by her father for her absconding which is marked as Ex.P.5. But when the petitioner has went to Rajastan along with the respondent, she was major on day of her marriage and on the day she visited to the sub registrar office and respondent has not took her forcibly and on petitioner's fault as she has concealed fact from her parents about her travel along with the respondent to Rajastan , false complaint has been lodged by her father, when he was not aware of the petitioner all these beheviour is tactics of the petitioner. Further if the respondent has forced the petitioner and he had 30 Crl.Misc.146/2017 relationship with the petitioner forcibly cheat. the petitioner had opportunity to inform about this to relatives who were living near to the respondent's house but the petitioner has not did so. Even she has also deposed in her cross examination that her parents have visited the respondent house in the month of April there they met petitioner stayed at respondent house for 15 days and they return back to the Bengaluru. That means her parents are well aware about petitioner and even they have also well aware of the petitioner and respondent relationship. Further she has taken the contention that her parents have return with sorrow and they were not happy with petitioner situation happened over there, even they worried about her. But after returning the petitioner's parents have not made any effort to register any case against the respondent with respect to any of the violence caused by the respondent against the petitioner even they have not tried to bring back the petitioner from channai.
34. Moreover, the respondent has filed conjugal right petition, instead of joining the respondent, the petitioner has herself has tried to sever herself from the respondent's company marital tag by filing marriage 31 Crl.Misc.146/2017 nullity petition bearing number 3300/2017 at Bengaluru she herself has produced the nullity petition copy which is marked as exhibit P.3, the petitioner cannot claim any maintenance from the respondent, even she herself has given contradictory answer to her pleadings that she enjoyed her marital life for 3 months in the respondent's house. Apart from that even the petitioner has not made any specific allegation against the respondent No.2 to 4. Thereby the respondent No.2 to 4 are discharged from the petition and petitioner herself has failed to prove the domestic violence caused by the respondent with cogent documentary evidence. It has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that in Kamalesh Devi V/s Jaipal & Others dated 04.10.2019, mere vague allegation is not sufficient to prove the case of domestic violence. With referring this definition and as the petitioner failed to prove the domestic violence, petitioner has not at all entitled to maintenance as well as any compensation. Hence, point No.1 answered in the negative, point No.2 answered in the affirmative and point 3 to 5 answered in the negative.
POINT No.6
35. In view of findings on point No.1 to 4, this Court proceeds to pass the following :
32 Crl.Misc.146/2017 ORDER Petition filed by the petitioner under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act., 2005 against the respondents is here by dismissed.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript computerized by her, revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 5th day of March, 2020) (TRIVENI IRAGAR) P.O. OF MMTC-VI, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PETITIONER :
PW-1 : Kajal Kailash DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR THE PETITIONER :
Ex.P.1 : Marriage Registration
Certifiacte
Ex.P.2 : Certified copy of
O.P.247/2017
Ex.P.3-4 : Certified copy of
MC.3300/2017, order sheet
and petition
Ex.P.4 : FIR
33 Crl.Misc.146/2017
WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENT :
RW-1 : Kailash Jain DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR THE RESPONDENT :
Ex.R-1 : Signature of petitioner in
Marriage Certificate
Ex.R-2 : Photo
Ex.R.3 : 13 Photos
P.O. OF MMTC-VI,
BENGALURU.