Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Aneesha Dutt vs Ashu Dutt And Ors on 26 July, 2023

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal

Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal

                               :1:             1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

             CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3709 OF 2022

 Ashu Dutt                                                ..... Petitioner
            Versus
 Aneesha Dutt
 and another                                              .... Respondents
                              .....
                             WITH
               INTERIM APPLICATION NO.120 OF 2023
                              IN
             CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3709 OF 2022

                        .....
                       WITH
    CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.468 OF 2022
                        .....
                       WITH
    CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.470 OF 2022

                           -----
 Mr. Rohan Cama, Advocate a/w. Ayushi Anandpara i/b.
 Sapana Rachure, for the Petitioner in WP/3709/2022 and
 for   Respondent     No.1      in   REVN/468/2022    &
 REVN/470/2022.

 Mr. Santosh Paul, Senior Advocate a/w. Mahir Bhatt,
 Maithreya Shetty i/b. Wasim Ansari for the Applicant in
 REVN/468/2022 & REVN/470/2022 and for the Respondent
 No.1 in WP/3709/2022.

 Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for the Respondent-State.
                               -----

                                     CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

                                     DATE   : 26th JULY, 2023

                                                                          1 of 10

  Deshmane(PS)




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                    ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :2:                1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

 P.C. :

 1.               Criminal Writ Petition No.3709/2022 is filed by

 the husband of the Respondent No.1; and Criminal Revision

 Application Nos.468/2022 & 470/2022 are filed by the wife

 against        the      Petitioner     in    Criminal     Writ        Petition

 No.3709/2022. For the sake of convenience, the parties are

 referred to as 'husband' and 'wife'.


 2.               Heard Shri Rohan Cama, learned counsel for the

 Petitioner in WP/3709/2022 (for Respondent No.1 in REVN/

 468/2022 & REVN/470/2022), Shri Santosh Paul, learned

 Senior Counsel for the Applicant in REVN/468/2022 &

 REVN/470/2022                   (for   the   Respondent          No.1          in

 WP/3709/2022) and Shri A.R. Patil, learned APP for the

 State.


 3.               The wife had filed the proceedings under the

 provisions of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence

 Act (for short, 'DV Act') vide C.C. No.340/DV/2017 before

 the Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.

 Learned Magistrate vide his judgment and order dated
                                                                             2 of 10




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                       ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :3:                    1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

 16.1.2021 disposed of the proceedings by recording the

 following operative part of the order :

              "i.     The application is partly allowed.
              ii.     The respondent no.1 is directed not to
                      commit any domestic violence of any kind
                      with the applicant in future.        He shall
                      restrain himself from filing any complaint
                      against her and her relatives in future.
              iii.    The respondent No.1 shall pay Rs.30,000/-
                      (Rupees Thirty Thousands) per month to the
                      applicant and her child as maintenance and
                      education expenses from the date of this
                      order.
              iv.     The reliefs sought by applicant for F-1,
                      Beach House, stridhan and compensation is
                      rejected.      She can approach appropriate
                      forum for her said reliefs.
              v.      This order will not affect the amount of
                      arrears if any standing against respondent
                      No.1 consequential to the interim order
                      passed earlier.
              vi.     Copy of this Judgment be given to both the
                      parties, free of costs."



 4.                  Both the parties, being aggrieved by that order,

 preferred separate Appeals before the Court of Sessions at

 Dindoshi, Mumbai.                   The wife preferred Criminal Appeal

                                                                                 3 of 10




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                           ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :4:                  1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

 No.28/2021 and the husband preferred Criminal Appeal

 No.77/2021. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dindoshi,

 Mumbai vide his common order dated 10.8.2022 passed the

 following order :

                "1. Criminal Appeal No.28 of 2021 is partly
                      allowed and amount of maintenance is
                      enhanced       from   Rs.30,000/-   p.m.      to
                      Rs.75,000/- p.m.
                2.    Criminal Appeal No.77 of 2021 is partly
                      allowed and the order of Ld. Trial Court
                      restraining the husband from filing any
                      complaint against wife and her relatives
                      stands set aside.
                3.    Rest of the order in the impugned Judgment
                      is maintained.
                4.    Original Judgment & order be kept in
                      Criminal Appeal No.28 of 2021 & its true
                      copy in Criminal Appeal No.77 of 2021.
                5.    R & P be sent to Lower Court."



 5.               Again, both the parties being aggrieved by the

 modification of the order of the Magistrate by learned

 Additional Sessions Judge, preferred these proceedings

 before this Court.



                                                                               4 of 10




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                         ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :5:         1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt




 6.               The brief submissions broadly made by both the

 parties are as follows.


 7.               Learned counsel Shri Rohan Cama on behalf of

 the husband, made following submissions:


 i.      There was delay in filing the domestic violence

          complaint. The last incident was in the year 2012; and

          the complaint proceedings were filed under the DV Act

          in the year 2017.


 ii.     There was no allegation of any physical or economic

          abuse. The allegations regarding mental harassment

          are vague and are made with malafide intentions.


 iii.    The husband has meager income compared to the wife

          who has considerable income.


 iv.     There was suppression of material facts by the wife.


 v.      He further submitted that learned Additional Sessions

          Judge has not referred to any of the documents which

                                                                      5 of 10




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :6:         1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

          were tendered in evidence in respect of the income of

          the parties; and yet, arrived at the figure of

          maintenance arbitrarily.


 8.               Learned Senior counsel Shri    Santosh Paul on

 behalf of the wife made the following submissions :


      i. According to him, the husband is son of an IPC officer

         and by using his clout, was continuously harassing the

         wife by making various complaints.


      ii. There were many FIRs lodged against the wife; and in

         Mumbai, in three FIRs, B-Summary Reports were

         submitted mentioning that the FIRs were false.


      iii. On one occasion, the wife was brought back even after

         crossing the barrier of Customs & Immigration when

         she was about to board a flight with her three children.


      iv. Both the Courts did not give any relief as far as the

         Stridhan was concerned. According to learned Senior

         Counsel, it is a settled law that the Stridhan which she

         gets before and after the marriage is her own property
                                                                      6 of 10




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :7:           1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

         and as a natural consequence, the Stridhan should

         have been returned to her.


      v. He submitted that there was no delay in filing the DV

         proceedings because she was fighting all the FIRs and

         all the proceedings against her and she was trying to

         get back her Stridhan.


      vi. He submitted that she does not have income on her

         own but she is entirely dependent on her father who is

         suffering from cancer and other serious ailments.


   vii. He further submitted that the custody of two of her

          children was taken away by deceit and only third

          youngest son is now in her custody. The wife's parents

          are spending considerable amount for his education.


 9.               I have considered these submissions. I have also

 perused the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge.

 The order does not show that the record about the income of

 the parties was perused or considered by the Sessions Court.

 Therefore, the figure mentioned in his operative part will

                                                                        7 of 10




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                  ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :8:                   1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

 have to be considered based on the record of the case.

 Learned Judge's observation about Stridhan being part of the

 appeal proceedings in the matrimonial matter, needs

 consideration because according to learned counsel for the

 wife the Stridhan                   was never a part of the matrimonial

 proceedings and hence is not part of the Appeal proceedings.

 Therefore, learned Judge should have considered the

 question of returning the Stridhan independently based on

 the evidence before him.


 10.              Considering all these submissions and the

 reasons mentioned by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

 both the parties have made out a case for admission of their

 matters.         These matters require consideration and also

 perusal of the record and proceedings.                     Therefore, I am

 inclined to admit these matters. The question is about the

 interim relief. To that, Shri Cama submitted that without

 prejudice to the rights and contentions of the husband, for

 the next three months, by way of interim arrangement; the

 husband shall deposit Rs.75,000/- directly in the account of

                                                                                8 of 10




::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023                          ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::
                                :9:                       1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt

 the wife. The submission is reasonable. Therefore, I am

 inclined       to     take          this   submission     into      account         for

 consideration of the interim relief. By way of interim relief,

 the order passed by the Sessions Court is required to be

 stayed. Learned Senior Counsel for the wife submitted that

 the husband be directed to clear the arrears.


 11.              Hence, the following order:

                                      :: O R D E R :

:

i. Rule is issued in Criminal Writ Petition No.3709/2022.
ii. Criminal Revision Application Nos.468/2022 & 470/2022 are admitted.
iii.     R & P be called.

iv.      Rule is made returnable on 26.10.2023.

v.       The husband shall clear the arrears as per the order
         passed        by       learned      Magistrate       in     the      original
         proceedings.

vi.      By way of interim arrangement, the husband shall
deposit Rs.75,000/- for the month of August 2023, Rs.75,000/- for the month of September 2023 and Rs.75,000/- for the month of October 2023 in the wife's account.
9 of 10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 ::: : 10 : 1.wp-3709-22-revns-468-470-22.odt vii. On this condition, there shall be interim stay on the order dated 10.8.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge which is impugned in all these matters, till the next date.

viii. Stand over to 26.10.2023.

ix. If the matters are not heard and decided on the scheduled date, then the parties are at liberty to file applications for appropriate interim reliefs.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS) 10 of 10 ::: Uploaded on - 27/07/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 28/07/2023 22:55:41 :::