Bangalore District Court
Smt. Pratibha vs Sri. Prabhakar Reddy.R on 15 November, 2021
1 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE TRAFFIC
COURT-I
AT MAYOHALL, BANGALORE.
Present : Smt.Sharmila Kamath. K. B.A L.L.M
Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court-I,
Bengaluru.
DATED THIS 15th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021
Crl.Misc.No.276/2018
Petitioner: Smt. Pratibha, w/o R.Pabhakar Reddy,
D/o P.Prakash Rao, aged 33 years,R/a No.C-
1, Sraddha Residency, 1st B Cross,
Kaggadasapura, C.V Raman Nagar,
Bengaluru-560 093.
(Advocate SRI SHK)
V/S
Respondent: Sri. Prabhakar Reddy.R,
S/o Ramakrishna Reddy, aged 39 years,
R/a No.311/312, 2nd cross, Panathur Layout,
Before Railway bridge, Bengaluru-560103
Working at,
RMZ Ecoworld, Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd.,
6th Floor, Campus SB RMZ Ecoworld,
Sarjapur, Marathalli, Outer Ring Road,
Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru east taluk,
Bengaluru-560103.
(Exparte)
ORDER
The Petitioner filed petition against Respondent U/sec.12 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act by seeking protection order, maintenance of Rs.1,25,000/-p.m and compensation of Rs. 50,00,000/- .
2 Crl.Misc.No.276/20182. The petition averments briefly stated as follows:
The marriage between petitioner and respondent was solminized on 19.08.2015 at Tirumala Tirupati. After the marriage petitioner started to reside with respondent at petitioner's parental residence at Bengaluru. Out of their wedlock one girl child by name Dikshita was born on 09.06.2016. The respondent started to demand money from petiitioner's father in order to avail rental premises. The petitioner's father transferred an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the account of respondent. Again petitioner's father spent an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- to purchase fridge, washing machine, cot and other furnitures. The respondent not taken care of petitioner during her pregnancy by providing food and medication. Again respondent demanded money for the establishment of his own software firm. There after petitioner was harassed for want of dowry. The respondent is working as a Service Line Manager at Capgemini and earning montly income of Rs. 2,50,000/-. The respondent not provided basic necessities to the petitioner and her minor daughter. On 15.10.2018 the respondent assaulted the petitioner and thrown her out of matrimonial home. The petitioner is residing at the mercy of her parents. Hence the petition.
3. After the service of notice Respondent not appeared before the Court hence placed exparte.
4. Heard argument.
5. On basis of the above mentioned averments the following points do arise for my consideration:
3 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018Point no.1. Whether petitioner proves that the respondent has committed domestic violence upon the petitioner?
Point no.2. Whether the petitioner proves that she is entitled for the reliefs as sought for?
Point no.3. What order?
6. Perused the entire records, my answer to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative Point No.2: Partly in the Affirmative Point No.3: As per final orders for the following:
REASONS
7. Point No.1 : Petitioner sought protection order. Inorder to get relief under this petition the petitioner has to prove that there is a domestic relationship, shared household and she was subjected to domestic violence by the respondent. The petitioner submitted that she is the legally wedded wife of respondent and after marriage she stayed with respondent. This contension remained unchallenged. There is nothing to disbelieve the domestic relationship and shared household of petitioner and respondent.
8. In order to prove the case petitioner examined herself as PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 to P9. In the examination in chief affidavit petitioner reiterated the petition averments. Petitioner submitted that she was subjected to domestic violence by the respondent. She was harassed for want of dowry. The petitioner was treated as maid servant and not provided with basic 4 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 necessities. On 15.10.2018 respondent assaulted the petitioner and thrown her out of matrimonial home. The version of PW1 remained unchallenged as she was not subjected to cross examination. Nothing is there to disbelieve the version of PW1. The evidence of PW1 shows that she was subjected to physical, mental and economic abuse. Hence I answer point no.1 in the affirmative.
9.Point No.2: On perusal of evidence of PW1 she was subjected to domestic violence. In order to protect petitioner from future domestic violence it is just and proper to grant protection order.
10. Petitioner sought maintenance of Rs.1,25,000/-p.m and compensation of Rs. 50,00,000/-. The petitioner filed Assets and Liabilities affidavit, wherein the petitioner mentioned that she is not a working woman and the avocation and income of respondent is not mentioned. The petitioner in the petition submitted that the respondent is working as Service Line Manager in Capgemini and earning monthly income of Rs. 2,50,000/-. The petitioner inorder to substantiate this contention not produced any document. However the respondent being the husband of petitioner and father of minor child, it is his bounden duty to provide basic necessities to his wife and child. Hence by considering facts and circumstances of the case and standard of living of parties this Court is of a view that if the respondent is directed to pay Rs. 3000/-p.m each to the petitioner and her minor child from the date of petition would meet the ends of justice. There is no convincing evidence to grant compensation of Rs. 50,00,000/-. Hence I 5 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 answer Point No 2 partly in the Affairmative.
11.Point No.3: In view of the discussions made in the point No.1 and 2, I proceed to pass following.
ORDER The petition filed by petitioner U/sec 12 of Protection of Women Domestic Violence Act is hereby partly allowed.
The respondent is hereby restrained from committing any act of domestic violence upon the petitioner.
The respondent is hereby directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 3,000/-p.m. from the date of petition till her life time.
The respondent is hereby directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 3,000/-p.m.to his minor daughter Kum.Dikshita from the date of petition till completion of her graduation or date of marriage which ever is earlier.
The other reliefs claimed by the petitioner are hereby dismissed.
The office is directed to issue free copy of the order to the petitioner.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 15th day of November 2021).
(Sharmila Kamath.K) MMTC-1 Bengaluru.
6 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for petitioner:-
PW1 : Smt. Pratibha List of documents marked for petitioner:
EX.P1 : Marriage Invitation card EX.P2 : Copies of SBI Bank Credit Card EX.P3 : MLC report EX.P4 : Copy of complaint EX.P5 : Copy of Adhar card EX.P6 : Marriage Registration card EX.P7 : Birth Certificate EX.P8 : Copies ofSBI account EX.P9 : CD List of witnesses examined for Respondent: Nil List of documents marked for Respondent: Nil (Sharmila Kamath.K) MMTC-1MayoHall Bengaluru.7 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018
(Order pronounced in the open court via separate order sheet) ORDER The petition filed by petitioner U/sec 12 of Protection of Women Domestic Violence Act is hereby partly allowed.
The respondent is hereby restrained from committing any act of domestic violence upon the petitioner.
The respondent is hereby directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- p.m. from the date of petition till her life time.
The respondent is hereby directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- p.m. to his minor daughter Kum.Dikshita from the date of petition till completion of her graduation or date of marriage which ever is earlier.
The other reliefs claimed by the petitioner are herebydismissed. The office is directed to issue free copy of the order to the petitioner.
(Sharmila Kamath.K) MMTC-1 Bengaluru.8 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 9 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 10 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 11 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 12 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 13 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 14 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 15 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 16 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018 17 Crl.Misc.No.276/2018