Bangalore District Court
Smt. Jeevitha vs H.B. Somashekhar on 7 November, 2024
1
C.Misc. 64/2016
KABC050054262016
Presented on : 22-04-2016
Registered on : 22-04-2016
Decided on : 07-11-2024
Duration : 8 years, 6 months, 15 days
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS (TRAFFIC
COURT-III), BENGALURU CITY
DATED THIS THE 07th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024
Present: Smt. Kusuma. V.
BAL, LLB
JMFC (TC-III), Bengaluru.
Crl. Misc. No. 64/2016
Petitioner : Smt. Jeevitha
D/o D. Nagaraj,
W/o H.B. Somashekar,
Aged about 24 Yrs,
R/at No.08,
3rd Floor, 17th Main,
Kurubarahalli,
JC Nagar,
Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru-86.
(By Sri. C.K.G Adv.)
V/s.
2
C.Misc. 64/2016
H.B. Somashekar
Respondent : S/o Late Billiyaiah,
Aged about 36 Yrs,
R/at No.8,
17th Main, Kurubarahalli,
Pipeline Road,
JC Nagar,
Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru-86.
(By Sri. K.K.M. Adv.)
ORDERS ON MAIN PETITION
1. This is petition filed by the petitioner u/sec.
12 of Protection Of Women From Domestic
Violence Act, 2005.
2. By filing this petition the petitioner has
sought various reliefs fallen U/sec. 18, 19, 20 and
22 of PWDV Act-2005.
3. The format as required under the DV Act is
duly filled up and the same is presented by the
petitioner along with the affidavit. In the required
3
C.Misc. 64/2016
format, the detail of the petitioners' case cannot be
made out, the same can be gone through in the
evidence let in by the petitioner. Hence, before
considering the reliefs sought for, it becomes just
and necessary to look into the case of the
petitioner.
4. The petitioner stated that the marriage
between petitioner and respondent took place on
16.11.2011 at about Ashoka Convention Hall,
Industrial Estate, West of Chord Road,
Rajajinagar, Bengaluru-10 as per Hindu rites and
customs.
5. The petitioner further submits that all the
marriage expenses of Rs.5,00,000/- was incurred
by the petitioner parents. The respondent family
have demanded dowry and gold ornaments to the
petitioner's parents as per the demands of the
4
C.Misc. 64/2016
respondent and his family members. The petitioner
and respondent started the marital life at
respondent's house. The petitioner was looked
after well by the respondent and his family for few
days, thereafter the respondent showed disrespect
and showed adamant nature to the petitioner and
her parents. The respondent started harassing and
abusing the petitioner at the instantiation of his
mother. The petitioner was harassed by the
respondent and his mother that sufficient dowry
was not given.
6. The petitioner further submits that, during
the petitioner's stay in the respondent's house, the
respondent has totally neglected the petitioner and
never used to spend time for the petitioner. The
respondent used to assault the petitioner and
harass the petitioner in the matrimonial house.
5
C.Misc. 64/2016
The respondent never showed any interest in the
petitioner.
7. The petitioner submits that, the respondent
never treated the petitioner as his wife and used to
assault, harass, physically and mentally and never
used to provide the basic necessities to the
petitioner. The petitioner further submits that the
petitioner is eking her livelihood with great
difficulty. The parents of the petitioner is aged and
they are not in a position to look after the
petitioner. The petitioner being the wife of the
respondent, the respondent is duty bound to
maintain the petitioner.
8. The petitioner submits that, the respondent
is working as Assistant Secretary Grade-IV in
Departmental of Agricultural Marketing and
drawing a salary of Rs.22,330/- per month.
6
C.Misc. 64/2016
Further respondent is a real estate agent. The
respondent is having two immovable properties at
Bengaluru in the name of the respondent's is
deriving rental income of Rs.50,000/- per month
from the said two properties. Totally the
respondent is getting a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- per
month. Hence, this petition.
9. On service of notice, the respondent has
appeared before court and filed vakalath through
his counsel. The respondent submits that the
petition is neither maintainable in law nor on facts
and the petitioner has suppressed all the real and
correct material facts. It is submitted that the
petition filed by the petitioner is making an
unlawful and illegal claim. It is submitted that, the
respondent made the petitioner continue her
studies even after marriage and she completed her
7
C.Misc. 64/2016
graduation course during 2012. It is submitted
that, after the marriage the petitioner accompanied
the respondent and was living with the
respondent.
10. It is submitted that, since the date of
marriage the petitioner exhibited her adamant
nature and showed disrespect towards elderly
persons related to the respondent i.e.,
respondent's mother and other family members
and also behaved with disregard and disrespect
towards the respondent in various modes. It is
submitted that, subsequent to the marriage, the
petitioner started to abuse the respondent and his
mother i.e., her mother-in-law for every small and
silly issues.
11. The petitioner did not show any inclination
of carrying on her matrimonial duties and
8
C.Misc. 64/2016
responsibilities as a dutiful and sincere Hindu wife
would do. It is submitted that, the petitioner from
the date of their marriage on several occasions was
insulting the respondent on the grounds that there
is a difference in age between petitioner and the
respondent and the same was not disclosed prior
to marriage and the petitioner was treating the
respondent in a very arrogant humiliating and
insulting manner. She was not giving proper
response to the respondent and also not even
taking care of the respondent in a proper way.
12. It is submitted that, on every occasion on
one pretext or the other she insulted and quarreled
with her mother-in-law stating that food prepared
by her was not good and there after she was also
complaining to her parents over phone. It is
submitted that the petitioner also humiliated the
9
C.Misc. 64/2016
respondent and his mother in front of the guests
and neighbors due to which the good atmosphere
of family was spoil by the petitioner on one or
other reasons due to which the respondent was
facing mental agony and humiliation within
relatives and surroundings neighborhood.
13. It is submitted that prior to leaving the
respondent's house for a small and petty reasons
the petitioner raised an issue over which she
started to quarrel with her mother-in-law for which
her father and mother came down to the
respondent house and after counseling the
petitioner they would advise her to behave properly
and adjust to her family life. Later she left
respondent home without intimating the
respondent or her mother-in-law.
14. It is submitted that, the respondent and his
10
C.Misc. 64/2016
mother also tried to console the petitioner's father
to advise the petitioner to come back to her
matrimonial house in order to lead a good and
happy family life at that point of time the
petitioner's father specifically stated that coming
back to her matrimonial life is left to her choice
and he shall not be forced to go back to her
matrimonial house.
15. It is submitted that during December 2012,
the respondent once again telephoned to the
petitioner and at that point of time she was
specifically stated that "Ninna Dari Ninage Nanna
Dari Nanage" and refused to come back to the
matrimonial house of the respondent. It is
submitted that the petitioner taking advantage of
the soft and politeness of the respondent started to
harass the respondent mentally and was abusing
11
C.Misc. 64/2016
in the filthy language and without giving proper
facility to the respondent.
16. It is submitted that at no point of time
neither the respondent nor his mother scolded the
petitioner and she was looked after her in a
passionate and loving manner and also provided
her with all amenities. It is submitted that the
petitioner was also black mailing the respondent
and his mother that she would file a false
complaints of dowry harassment and get them
arrested and prosecute them in the court of law
without any reasons. It is submitted that after the
said instance the petitioner left her matrimonial
house and started to stay with her parents since
20.01.2014 and without any intimation to the
respondent. It is submitted that, the respondent is
working as a Assistant Secretary in APMC at
12
C.Misc. 64/2016
Doddaballapura and he has getting monthly salary
of Rs.22,330/- per month. Hence, prays to dismiss
the petition.
17. Keeping in mind the evidence given by the
petitioner it becomes just and necessary to look
into whether the orders required by the petitioner
various reliefs which are fallen U/Sec. 18, 19, 20
& 22 of DV Act can be granted.
18. The petitioner in support of her case has got
examined herself as PW.1 and got exhibited
documents as Exs.P.1 to 8. Ex.P.1 is marriage
invitation, Ex.P.2 is copy of complaint dtd:
21.01.2014, Ex.P.3 is salary slip of respondent,
Exs.P.4 & 5 are khatha extracts, Exs.P.6 & 7 are
holder khatha extracts and Ex.P.8 is GPA. The
respondent examined himself as RW.1 and got
exhibited Exs.R.1 to 5. Ex.R.1 is medical
13
C.Misc. 64/2016
documents, Ex.R.2 is salary slip of petitioner and
Exs.R.3 to 5 are photos.
19. Heard both sides and perused the
materials placed on record.
20. The points that arise for consideration
are:-
1. Whether the petitioner is
entitled for protection order
relief as contemplated
U/sec.18 of DV Act?
2.Whether the petitioner is
entitled for residence relief as
contemplated U/sec.19 of DV
Act?
3. Whether the petitioner is
entitled for monetary relief as
contemplated U/sec. 20 of DV
Act?
4.Whether the petitioner is
entitled for compensation relief
as contemplated U/sec. 22 of
DV Act?
5. What order?
14
C.Misc. 64/2016
21. The findings to the above points are as
follows:-
Point Nos.1 to 4 - In the Negative
Point No.5 - As per Final Order, for
the
following:-
REASONS
22. Reasoning on Point Nos.1 to 4: Since
these points are interconnected with each other
and requires common appreciation of evidence,
hence to avoid repetition of facts all the points are
taken together for common consideration.
23. The case of the petitioner is that the
respondent has given mental and physical
harassment and for grant of permanent
accommodation. The petitioner has sought for
various reliefs which are fallen U/sec. 18, 19, 20
and 22 of DV Act.
15
C.Misc. 64/2016
24. In the affidavit filed by the petitioner along
with petition she has stated that the averments
made in the petition are all true and correct. The
petitioner has stated that she was subjected to
verbal and emotional abuse and she was also
subjected to economic violence by not providing
money for maintaining herself. Further, the
petitioner stated that the respondent and his
mother always tortured the petitioner both
mentally and physically by abusing her in filthy
language without any reason. The respondent
being husband of the petitioner did not control the
illegal acts of the mother-in-law. Thereafter, the
respondent has neglected the petitioner and also
avoiding maintaining the petitioner for one or
other reasons. When the petitioner tried to leave
her marital house, the respondent was not living
16
C.Misc. 64/2016
the petitioner to lead her own life. But, in the
objections, the respondent had denied all
allegations made by the petitioner. Further, the
respondent stated that the petitioner herself has
neglected the respondent and his mother by
abusing them in front of guests and relatives.
Further, he stated that for silly reasons the
petitioner quarreling with respondent and his
mother. In this regard several panchayath was
conveyed, but the petitioner has not mend her
behaviour. Thereafter she left the matrimonial
home without any reason and staying with her
parents.
25. It is submitted that soon after the
marriage the petitioner came to the matrimonial
home to cohabit with the respondent. During the
stay of petitioner in the matrimonial home, the
17
C.Misc. 64/2016
petitioner stay alone as per her will and wish and
the petitioner is not mingling with any other
members of the family. Without any reason the
petitioner has filed this petition.
26. Further on perusal of the petition, it can
be seen that the petitioner and respondent are
living in shared household, at that time the
respondent and her mother have harassed the
petitioner emotionally and mentally by not taking
care of her. On the other hand, the respondent
has also filed objections by denying the allegations
of the petitioner leveled against him and his
mother. Thereafter, also the respondent had
looked after the petitioner with fulfilling her all
necessities with love and affection.
27. No doubt, as per Sec.3 of DV Act, if at all
the respondent commits any domestic violence as
18
C.Misc. 64/2016
above pleaded is fully established by the petitioner
then definitely the petitioner will be entitled for an
order of residential orders as per Sec.19 of DV Act
and mandatory reliefs as contemplated under
Sec.20 of the Act.
28. As per Sec.19 of DV Act while disposing
an application U/sec.12(1) PWDV Act, a
Magistrate, may on being satisfied that the
domestic violence has taken place can pass
residence order restraining the respondent from
dispossessing or in any other manner disturbing
the possession of the petitioner from the shared
household.
29. In the case on hand, it is the case of the
petitioner that she is residing along with the
respondent after the marriage in the shared house.
When in the respondent has given mental and
19
C.Misc. 64/2016
emotional torture and also he neglected the
petitioner.
30. On perusal of the pleadings as well as
evidence of both sides, it appears that there is no
such domestic violence caused by the respondent
against the petitioner. Further, it appears that the
petitioner herself has left the matrimonial home
and went to her parents house without giving any
intimation to the respondent. Therefore, the
question of granting residential orders as per
Sec.19 of DV Act cannot be considered in favour of
the petitioner.
31. Further, in the cross examination
conducted by the counsel for the respondent she
admits that the respondent has not harassed the
petitioner physically and after the marriage till
January 2014, both petitioner and respondent had
20
C.Misc. 64/2016
lived happily in the matrimonial home. It is very
clear that during the stay of the petitioner in the
matrimonial home, the respondent and his mother
have not given any mental and physical
harassment against the petitioner as stated by the
petitioner in her petition. Therefore, the
respondent has not caused any domestic violence
against the petitioner.
32. With regard to the possession of
mandatory reliefs as contemplated under Sec.20, it
becomes just and necessary for the petitioner to
establish the same.
33. The fact that both petitioner and the
respondent are wife and husband is not in dispute.
When the petitioner has let in evidence she has
stated that subsequent to marriage, she is residing
along with the respondent in the shared
21
C.Misc. 64/2016
household, in their the respondent intentionally
neglected the petitioner. The said contention had
been categorically denied by the respondent.
Further, he stated that without any reason the
petitioner has left the matrimonial home. At this
stage, no need to act like what the petitioner
stated in her petition.
34. On the other hand, after service of notice,
the respondent has appeared before the court by
filing vakalath from his counsel and filed
objections to the main petition by denying all
averments pleaded by the petitioner in her
petition.
35. The petitioner examined herself as PW-1 by
filing affidavit of examination-in-chief. In the said
examination-in-chief, she reiterated the averments
of the petition. The counsel for the respondent has
22
C.Misc. 64/2016
cross examined the PW.1. In the cross
examination, she admitted that the respondent is
taking care of her during her stay at matrimonial
home. It seems that there was no any domestic
violence caused by the respondent towards the
petitioner. The said admission is very clear that
the respondent has not given any torture to the
petitioner in any manner as stated by her in the
petition.
36. On the other hand, the respondent himself
examined as RW.1 by filing affidavit in lieu of
examination-in-chief and reiterated the averments
of his objections. In the cross examination, he
denied the suggestions made by counsel for the
petitioner and he had not admitted any
suggestions of the petitioner.
37. On going through the oral and
23
C.Misc. 64/2016
documentary evidence as well as affidavit of assets
liabilities furnished by both parties, it is clear that
the petitioner is working as Deputy Branch
Manager in Yes Bank and getting salary of
Rs.56,400/- per month. Further on perusal of
Ex.R.2 salary slip, it appears that the gross salary
of petitoner for the month of May 2023 is
Rs.1,39,035/-. At this juncture the petitioner is
having sufficient income to lead her life. Looking
into the oral and documentary evidence by both
sides, it clear that there is no any domestic
violence caused by the respondent towards the
petitioner. Further, she is utterly fails to prove her
case by oral and documentary evidence.
38. On perusal of the entire pleadings and
documents and oral testimony of the petitioner, it
is crystal clear that the petitioner is legally wedded
24
C.Misc. 64/2016
wife of respondent and both are living in the
shared house under same roof. Further, it is clear
that the respondent has not given any harassment
mentally and physically to the petitioner.
39. It is undisputed that on the date of filing
the petitioner was legal wedded wife of respondent.
Further, the respondent in his objections stated
that she is having sufficient income to lead her life.
To this effect the counsel for the respondent has
confronted her salary slip in cross examination of
PW.1. Mere admission is very clear that the
respondent has not caused any domestic violence
against the petitioner as alleged by the petitioner
in her petition.
40. Further, the petitioner is failed to prove the
allegations which are made by her in the petition
as well as in examination in chief in respect of
25
C.Misc. 64/2016
domestic violence caused by the respondent u/sec.
3 of PWDV Act.
The Section 3 in The Protection of Women
from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 reads as under;
Sec. 3. Definition of domestic violence.--
For the purposes of this Act, any act, omission or
commission or conduct of the respondent shall
constitute domestic violence in case it.
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety,
life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical,
of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and
includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse,
verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the
aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any
other person related to her to meet any unlawful
demand for any dowry or other property or valuable
security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved
person or any person related to her by any conduct
mentioned in clause (a) or clause (b); or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether
physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.
41. On careful perusal of the above section, it
is clear that in this case, the respondent has not
committed any domestic violence against the
petitioner as explained above. On discussing
26
C.Misc. 64/2016
above, if the respondent has not committed any
domestic violence against the petitioner, as
contemplated u/sec. 3 of PWDV Act, the petitioner
is not entitled for any of the reliefs as prayed by
her in the petition. Hence, this court answer these
point nos.1 to 4 in the the negative.
42. Point No.5: In view of the findings on
the above point nos.1 to 4 and the reasons stated
therein, this court proceed to pass the following: -
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner U/sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is hereby dismissed.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 7 th day of November 2024).
(Kusuma. V) JMFC (TC-III), Bengaluru.
27C.Misc. 64/2016 ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for Petitioner:-
PW-1 Jeevitha List of documents marked for Petitioner:
Ex.P.1 Marriage invitation Ex.P.2 Copy of complaint dtd: 21.01.2014 Ex.P.3 Salary slip of respondent Exs.P.4 & 5 Khatha extracts Exs.P.6 & 7 Holder khatha extracts Ex.P.8 GPA List of witnesses examined for Respondent:-
RW.1 Somashekar. H.B List of documents marked for Respondent:
Ex.R.1 Medical documents Ex.R.2 Salary slip of petitioner Exs.R.3 to 5 Photos JMFC (T.C-III), Bengaluru.