Bangalore District Court
L. Harshitha vs Murugan on 23 April, 2025
KABC080019732024
Presented on : 04-04-2024
Registered on : 04-04-2024
Decided on : 23-04-2025
Duration : 1 years, 0 months, 19 days
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST
CLASS (TRAFFIC COURT-VI), BENGALURU CITY.
DATED THIS 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2025.
PRESENT : Smt.AKHILA H.K. B.A., LL.B.,
JMFC (TRAFFIC COURT-VI),
BENGALURU.
Crl.Misc.No.83/2024
Petitioner No.1 : Smt.L. Harshitha,
W/o Sri. P. Murugan
Aged about 26 years
Petitioner No.2 : Kum. Amirtha
D/o P. Murugan
Aged about 8 years,
Represented by her mother &
natural guardian L. Harshitha
Both are R/at;
No.796, New Binny Layout,
West Zone, Binnypet,
Bengaluru - 560 023.
(Rep. By Sri/Smt.B.G.N., Adv.,)
2
Crl.Misc.83/2024
V/s
Respondent No.1 : Sri.P. Murugan
S/o Panner Selvam,
Aged about 36 years
Respondent No.2 : Smt.Bhagyalakhsmi
W/o Panner Selvam,
Aged about 56 years
Both are R/at;
No.27/1, Sevenwells,
Thyagaraya Pillai Street,
Chennai - 600 001.
(Respondents placed Ex-parte)
JUDGMENT
The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Sec.12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
2. The brief facts of the petitioner's case are as under; The petitioner No.1 is the legally wedded wife of respondent No.1 and their marriage was solemnized on 27.11.2014 and from the wed lock they have one child i.e., petitioner No.2 herein. Further she submitted that, at the time of marriage the parents of the petitioner No.1 had given 28 sovereign gold jewellery, 1.5 k.g. Silver 3 Crl.Misc.83/2024 ornaments and Rs.1 lakh cash and other essential household articles to the respondents in form of dowry as demanded by the respondents and her parents have borne the entire marriage expenses around 10 lakhs. After the marriage she started to live with respondents at matrimonial house at Chennai and respondents have snatched all the gold and silver ornaments of the petitioner No.1 given in the marriage representing that at the time of traveling for honeymoon it was not safe to carry the ornaments but no such honeymoon trip was arranged by the respondents. Further she submitted that, baby shower and naming ceremony of her daughter performed by her parents as per the demand and up to the satisfaction of the respondents by spending Rs.3 lakhs. Further she submitted that, 2 nd petitioner is studying in 2nd standard at New Cambridge School and she is bearing the educational expenses. At the matrimonial home the respondent started harassing the petitioner both mentally and physically. At no time the respondent No.1 acted as a responsible husband and never took care of the petitioner and the child. But the respondent No.1 used to treat the petitioner as a puppet to fulfill his sexual needs and he was unnecessarily and without any reason abusing and humiliating the petitioner No.1 with filthy words in front of his family in 4 Crl.Misc.83/2024 the house. Respondent No.1 though he was earning sufficiently has not provided basic necessities to the petitioners and he had never shown love and affection towards the petitioners. Further she submitted that, respondent No.1 is having drinking habits and having illicit affair with his girlfriend namely M.Logeshwari with whom he stays till late at night and has plans to get married soon. Whenever she tried to enquire about his late arrival respondent No.1 would fumble and manipulate the context in front of his parents and minor child.
3. Further petitioner No.1 submitted that, respondent No.2 always influenced the respondent No.1 to demand more money from her family and pressurized the petitioner No.1 to bring more and more dowry from her parents. Respondents also forced on multiple times to give divorce to respondent No.1. Since the petitioners could not tolerate the cruelties were constrained to stay at the parental house of the petitioner No.1. After some time the respondent No.1 has filed a petition No.O.P.No.2772/2017 before the Prl. Family Court at Chennai and in conciliation proceedings the respondents assured and undertaken that they will not harass the petitioners and look after them well. It is also agreed 5 Crl.Misc.83/2024 that since the petitioner No.2 is already school going it is difficult for her to shift to Chennai and hence let the petitioners stay at Bengaluru in the parental house of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.1 shall visit petitioners frequently also pay Rs.5,000/- as monthly maintenance and provide other basic necessities to them, bear the educational expenses of the petitioner No.2 for six months and respondent No.1 will set up separate residence a Chennai and take back the petitioners to Chennai. With the said arrangements the said MC petition was ended in compromise on 23.10.2018.
4. Thereafter, respondent No.1 set up a rented house for the petitioners at Chennai. However, the respondent no.1 continued his cruelties on the petitioner No.1 and later abandoned them without providing them basic necessities. Even respondent No.1 did not pay the rents of the said house. In this regard petitioner No.1 was constrained to lodge police complaints twice against the respondents on 20.03.2019 before All Women police station but the police have not taken action against them. In the said condition the petitioners have taken shelter under the mercy of parents of petitioner No.1. Further she submitted that, respondent No.1 has filed a divorce case in HMOP No.643/2019 before Family Court, 6 Crl.Misc.83/2024 Chennai seeking divorce by suppressing aforesaid true facts and making all false and fictitious allegations against the petitioner No.1. In the said petition by showing wrong address of the petitioner No.1 and petitioner was placed ex-parte. Later the respondent No.1 has got succeeded in getting a ex-parte decree of divorce dated 25.09.2019. After she knowing the same she has filed necessary application to set aside the exparte decree as per the order dated continued in the contesting the matter on merits. Though the Hon'ble Family Court, Chennai was pleased to pass an order dated 11.07.2023 directing the respondent No.1 to pay Rs.3,000/- to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.4,000/- to the petitioner No.2 as interim maintenance during the pendency of the said petition but the respondent No.1 has failed to comply with the said order. Now the respondents are making arrangements to celebrate a second marriage to the respondent No.1 during subsistence of the present marriage. Further she submitted that, respondent No.1 has not provided basic necessities viz., food, shelter, clothes medical expenses, miscellaneous expenses, child educational expenses etc., Further she submitted that, respondent No.1 is a businessmen carrying on the business of selling and servicing of Home appliances having as service shop at Chennai and earning more 7 Crl.Misc.83/2024 than Rs.2 lakhs per month and he also owns a building at No.27/1, Sevenwells, Thyagaraya Pillai Street,Chennai
- 600 001 worth Rs.1.5 crore also getting rental income of Rs.60,000/- per month and he also has a share in the ancestral and joint family properties. In spite having sufficient source of income he has neglected to pay the maintenance to her and her child. Hence, she has prayed to allow her petition.
5. After the service of notice, respondent has not appeared before this court in spite of service of notice. Hence, respondents placed ex-parte.
6. The petitioner to substantiate her case has examined herself as PW.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 13.
7. Heard arguments on petitioner's side.
8. The following points that arises for my consideration are as under;
1. Whether the Petitioners prove that they were subjected to Domestic Violence by the respondents?
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for the reliefs as sought in the petition?
3. What order?
8Crl.Misc.83/2024
9. On perusal of materials before this court, my findings on the above points are as follows;
Point No.1 : Partly in the affirmative; Point No.2 : Partly in the affirmative; Point No.3 : As per final order for the following;
REASONS
10. POINT NO.1 : In a domestic violence case the petitioner has to prove the domestic relationship between herself and respondents, they were residing with the respondents in a shared household, the domestic violence was caused by the respondents upon them. The respondents have neglected the petitioner without any reasonable cause and the respondent No.1 is capable to provide maintenance to the petitioner.
11. In order to prove that, the respondents have committed domestic violence, the petitioner No.1 has examined herself as P.W.1 and filed her affidavit in lieu of examination in chief wherein she has reiterated the contents of her petition. In order to prove domestic relationship petitioner No.1 has produced wedding invitation card, birth certificate, Aadhar card, PAN card 9 Crl.Misc.83/2024 marked as Ex.P.1 to 4. In the birth certificate the name of the respondent No.1 is mentioned as father of petitioner No.2, in Aadhar card and Pan card of the petitioner No.1 the name of respondent No.1 mentioned as husband of petitioner No.1. Hence, Ex.P.1 to 4 proves the domestic relationship between respondents and petitioners. In order to prove domestic violence she has produced 7 jewelry bills marked as Ex.P.7 said to have been given by petitioner No.1's family to respondents, 4 bills for having purchased clothes for the respondent No.1 at the time of wedding marked as Ex.P.11, 86 medical bills of petitioner No.2 marked as Ex.P.5, 14 bills regarding the educational expenses of petitioner No.2 marked as Ex.P.6, 10 fee receipts with respect to petitioner No.2's school fees marked as Ex.P.8, 15 medical bills pertaining to the petitioner marked as Ex.P.10. Petitioner has submitted tickets for having traveled from Bangalore to Chennai marked as Ex.P.12 & 13 to prove that she has attempted to reside with the respondents. After petitioner No.1 filed this petition this Court issued notice to the respondents through RPAD and petitioner No.1 has submitted track consignment from postal website which shows that the notice was served on respondent No.1 and 2 on 18.09.2024. Hence, service was held sufficient and 10 Crl.Misc.83/2024 respondent No.1 and 2 were placed exparte. Since the respondents have not contested the matter, the said documents are unchallenged. If the respondents wanted to deny the said allegations they would have appeared before this court and would have challenged the same but they have not done so. Further, the respondents have not denied any of the allegations in the petition and hence these allegations have remained uncontroverted. Since, the proceedings under PWDV Act are quasi criminal and quasi civil in nature the evidence on record has to be decided on the basis of preponderance of probabilities and court should not look for proof beyond reasonable doubt. In this case the respondents were placed exparte in spite of sufficient service of notice. This conduct of the respondents probabalizes the allegations made by the petitioners. In this case the entire evidence of the petitioner is uncontroverted and not challenged. Therefore, the entire evidence of the petitioner has to be accepted.
12. In the present case respondent No.1 who is the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner No.2 has not paid any maintenance to them from the date of separation. He has also not paid the medical expenses and educational expenses of the petitioner and the child.
11Crl.Misc.83/2024 As already stated this constitutes economic abuse as contemplated in PWDV Act. Petitioner No.1 has also filed this case against respondent No.2 who is mother in law of petitioner No.1. However, petitioner has made vague and general statement against respondent No.2 and she has not submitted any proof to the Court to substantiate her allegation. Hence, case against respondent No.2 is dismissed. Hence, point No.1 answered partly in the affirmative.
13. Point No.2 :- The petitioner No.1 in this case has sought for Rs.1,00,000/- monthly maintenance for petitioner No.1 and 2 from respondent No.1 U/Sec.20 of PWDV Act. She has also sought for a direction to the respondent No.1 to provide same level of alternate accommodation. The petitioner No.1 in her assets and liability affidavit has stated that, she is unemployed and she has studied upto PUC. She has stated that, she requires Rs.1,20,000/- per month towards food, clothing, medical, shelter, educational expenses and transportation for herself and her child. She has submitted that, the respondent No.1 is working at HSC and he is earning Rs.1,50,000/- per month and he also has property at Nandambakkam worth Rs.80 lakhs. She has stated that, she is spending Rs.26,000/- towards 12 Crl.Misc.83/2024 child's school fees, private tuition, books, sports, summer camp etc., She has stated that, she has no assets or liabilities.
14. It is proved by discussion in point No.1 that, the respondent No.1 has committed domestic violence against the petitioners. The respondent No.1 has not paid any maintenance to the petitioner No.1 and her child till date. Admittedly, the child is in the custody of petitioner No.1 and she is bearing all the expenses. She has stated that, the respondent No.1 has deserted her and from that time he has not borne the expenses of the petitioners. Petitioner no.1 has produced the fee card of petitioner no.2 as Ex.P.6 and 8. She has also submitted 2 receipts to prove that she is studying marked as Ex.P.9. Petitioner no.2 is currently studying in 3 rd standard. There is no straight jacket formula to award maintenance. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajanesh V/s Neha reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324, the Court has to consider the status of the parties, earning capacity of the parties, needs and expenses of the petitioner, number of dependents on the respondent, expenses of the respondent, educational qualification of the parties, whether the petitioner has independent source and whether the same is sufficient to 13 Crl.Misc.83/2024 enable her to maintain herself, standard of living as she was accustomed to in the matrimonial home, whether she was working before marriage, cost of litigation, while ordering for maintenance. Petitioner No.1 has not produced any evidence to prove the income of the respondent but it is settled law that respondent No.1 being the husband of petitioner no.1 and father of petitioner no.2 is duty bound to maintain them. Further, there is nothing on record to show that he is suffering from any disability to disable him from maintaining his wife and children. Hence the respondent No.1 cannot escape his liability and he is duty bound to maintain his wife and child. Moreover, the petitioner No.1 has stated that, she is residing in her maternal home. But at the same time the maintenance awarded to be paid by the respondent No.1 cannot be so excessive that it is in the nature of penalty and the Court must always find a balance between the needs and expenses of both the parties.
15. Applying these propositions of law, the respondent No.1 is directed to pay maintenance of Rs.10,000/- each per month to Petitioner No.1 and 2 towards maintenance. Since the petitioner No.1 and 2 are residing with parents of petitioner No.1 it is not 14 Crl.Misc.83/2024 necessary to provide alternate accommodation to the petitioners. Petitioner No.1 has also sought for direction to the respondents to return of her gold and silver articles belonging to her which in their custody. But the petitioner No.1 has not specifically stated the gold and silver articles in the custody of the respondents. Hence, on the basis of vague statement by the petitioner this prayer of the petitioner cannot be allowed.
16. The petitioner No.1 has sought for direction to the respondent No.1 to pay compensation and damages of Rs.1,00,00,000/- for the physical and mental torture suffered at the hands of the respondent No.1. Sec.22 of PWDV Act states, Magistrate may grant compensation in addition to the other reliefs that may be granted under this Act and direct the respondent No.1 to pay compensation and damages for injuries including mental torture and emotional distress caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondent No.1. As discussed in point No.1 it is proved that the respondent No.1 has subjected the petitioners to domestic violence and petitioner no.1 has incurred litigation expenses as well due to the acts of respondent No.1. Hence, the petitioners have undergone severe emotional distress. U/Sec.22 of PWDV Act, petitioners are entitled for 15 Crl.Misc.83/2024 compensation. Hence, respondent No.1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- to the petitioner No.1 and 2 towards compensation. Petitioner No.1 has also sought for protection order against the respondents. But both of them are not residing under same roof. Hence, it is not necessary to pass protection order. In view of the above discussion, point No.2 answered partly in the affirmative.
17. Point No.3:- In view of the materials placed before this court, pleadings, deposition and documentary evidence this court proceed to pass the following;
ORDER The petition filed by the petitioners under Sec.12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is hereby allowed in part.
Respondent No.1 is hereby directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month (Rupees ten thousand only) to the petitioner No.1 towards maintenance from the date of petition till her life time or till she gets re-married whichever is earlier.
16Crl.Misc.83/2024 Further, respondent No.1 is hereby directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) per month to petitioner no.2 towards maintenance from the date of petition till she attains majority.
Further, respondent No.1 is directed
to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees two lakhs only) to the petitioners towards compensation within 3 months from the date of this order.
The above said maintenance amount shall be adjustable to the amount, if any, the petitioner No.1 on behalf of herself and on behalf of petitioner No.2 is getting towards maintenance from the respondent No.1 from any other proceedings.
Office is directed to furnish a copy of this order free of cost to the petitioner. (Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 23 rd day of April 2025).
(Akhila H.K.) JMFC (Traffic Court-VI), Bengaluru.
17Crl.Misc.83/2024 ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PETITIONER:
PW.1 L. Harshitha LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PETITIONER:
Ex.P.1 : Marriage invitation card
Ex.P.2 : Notarized Birth certificate
Ex.P.3 : Notarized Aadhar card
Ex.P.4 : Notarized Pan card
Ex.P.5 : Medical bills
Ex.P.6 : School fee receipts
Ex.P.7 : Jewels bills
Ex.P.8 : Educational expenses receipts
Ex.P.9 : College fee receipts
Ex.P.10 : Medical bills
Ex.P.11 : Cloth purchase bills
Ex.P.12 : Chennai Travel tickets
Ex.P.13 : Bus and Train tickets along with certificate
U/Sec.65(B) of Indian Evidence Act
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
-Nil-
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
-Nil-
(Akhila H.K.) JMFC (Traffic Court-VI), Bengaluru.