Karnataka High Court
N Shivakumar S/O. Late Ningaiah vs Tharashri @ B A Mangala W/O N Shivakumar on 13 March, 2012
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N. Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 137 DAY OF MARCH 2012 | sy, : BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. ANANDA *. CRIMINAL PETITION No.6 3 3/201 i C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.4412/201 Le CRL.P.No.633/2011 BETWEEN: N.Shivakumar S/o late Ningaiah Aged about 36 Years, School 7 Tea chet R/o Narayanapure Grama os K.R.Nagara Taluk >. : ve! Mysore District... _ oO _..Petitioner (By Sri Chetan Desai 7 Advoraie for M /s. Desai & Associates, Advocate 's) : Tharashri @ B.A.Mangale, ~~. W/o N.Shivakumar = Aged about 27 Years: ~.R/o Bandiganahally Grama _ Hallym:vsore Hobli 'Holenarasi pura Taluk. ... Respondent (By: Siiyuths Biddappa, Sunil & Nitin, Advocates) "this petition is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., praying os to, set aside the order dated 14.10.2010 passed by the . Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-Ill, Holenarasipura in Cri-A.No.75/2010 and also order dated 17.07.2010 passed "by, the Civil Judge & JMFC, Holenarasipura in Cri. =. Misc.(P.W.D.V.) No.2/2009. No CRL.P.No.4412/2011 BETWEEN: Tharashri @ B.A.Mangala W/o N.Shivakumar Aged about 27 Years R/o Bandiganahally Grama Hallymysore Hobli : . Holenarasipura Taluk. 2 ~Petitioner (By Sriyuths Siddappa, Sunil & Nitin, Adv urates) AND: Shri N.Shivakumar S/o late Ningaiah Aged about 36 Years R/o Narayanapura Grama K.R.Nagara Taluk 8 a, . Mysore District. ef Be, Respondent (By Sri Chetan Desai, . Adtvoc ale for M / s.Desai & Associates, Advocate: 8) This peti tion is filed. under section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to set. aside the order * dated 14.10.2010 passed by the Presiding. Officer, Fast-Track Court-IIl, Holenarasipura vide " Annexure- A in Cri. A.No.75/2010 to the extent the amount of compensation awarded to petitioner has been reduced and confirm the judgment dated 17.07.2010 passed by the Civil Judge & JMFC, Holenarasipura vide Annexure-B in Cri. "Misc.{P.W.D.V.) No.2/2009. _ These petitions coming on for admission this day, the Court made the following: : oo ORDER
The petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 633/2011 is. the husband. The petitioner in Criminal Petition No.44 127/201 7 is the wilte.
2. The petitioner in Criminal Petition No.4 12/2011 was before the trial court seeking 'certain' reliefs "under. ihe provisions of the Protection of Women 'from. Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, 'the Ach i) the trial court having regard to the fact that pai rties have two child en 1 and they are being taken care of 'by the wife and na considering the mental agony and | "other, factors : awarcied compensation of Rs.5,00,000/ under Section 22 of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, the husband Was pefore l-appellate court in Criminal | Appeel No.75/ 2010. The. learned Sessions Judge while | confirming thee veasons assigned by the learned trial Judge has) Jel heme from Rs.5,00,000/- to Rs.2;50,000 : having regard to the fact the husband had not " received any dowry and taking into consideration mental tort: ure undergone by the wife and amount required to take . care of the children. (i gu. gos * a oft
3. I have heard learned counsel for parties.
4. It is not in dispute that parties have fallen apart. itis not in dispute that children of parties namely Mohith "Raj. ~ and Bhanupriya are being taken care ef, by the wife. The ~ husband has been working as a Teacher.. During tre month"
of June, 2011 his gross salary was Rs. 15,599/ - per month.
5. The learned counsél for petitioner in Criminal Petition No.4412/2011 would submit that cbmpetisation should not have been reduced' from Rs.8.00,000/-to R8.2,50,000/-.
6. The learned counsel for petitiorier in Criminal Petition No.633/2013 would. subrait' that. the trial court should not have awarded compensation and the I-appellate court should have set aside the compensation awarded by the trial court.
7. ~Seetion 20-of the Protection of Women from Domestic Vidlerice Act,.2005, which provides for monetary reliefs reads ». thus:-
"20. Monetary reliefs.-(1) While disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12, the Magistrate may direct the respondent to pay CA monetary relief to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child of the aggrieved person as a result of the domestic violence and such relief may' include, but not limited to,- :
(a) the loss of earnings; "
(b) the medical expenses: - |
(c) the loss caused dts to the destraction, :
damage or removal Of any property 'from :
the control of the agerieved person: and.
(d) the maintenarice : for' the aggrieved person. as well 'as her, children." if any, including an-order under. or in' addition to an order of maintenance under section 125 "of. the Code af Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 af 1974) or any other law for the time being in. force:
42) The monetary relief granted under this .. section shali be. adequate, fair and reasonable ~. and-.cansistent with the standard of living to which thé. aggrieved person is accustomed. (3) The Magistrate shall have the power to order ar.appropriate lump sum payment or monthly "payments of maintenance, as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.
A: (i o C:
Pe, an ms OU SS oan 6 (4) The Magistrate shall send a copy of the order for monetary relief made under sub-section (1) to the parties to the application and to the in- ws, charge of the police station within the lecal limits of whose jurisdiction the respondent'.
resides.
(5) The respondent shail pay the monetary-relief granted to the aggrieved person within: the"
period specified in the order 'under sub-section (1).
(6) Upon the fatiure son' ihe "part of the respondent to make payment 'in' terms of the order under sub: section ( ay the Magistrate may direct. the eyplover of-.a debtor of the respondent... to -ditectly pay to the aggrieved person 'or to. deposit with the court a portion of the wages or salaries" or debt due to or accrued LO the credit..of the respondent, which amount : may. be: adjusted towards the monetary relief pay yeble by the respondent."
Ons of the considerations for grant of compensation is . he amount required for maintenance of aggrieved person.
Under section 20(2) of the Act, it is stated that the monetary 'ranted under this section shall be adequate, fair and ~ é mod reasonable and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved person is accustomed.
8. It is not in dispute that the husband has beer working as a Teacher and he is entitled to annuai increments; As per ; the salary certificate produced by the wile as on 09.01 20 12, gross salary of husband was Rs.17 BOL/ - per month... The wife has to take care of herself and, er childrén: she has to spend for their health and : 'edtication. Above _ all, compensation awarded lo the wile and children will have to be taken |. | into : consideration . | : 'while granting maintenance/peritianent, alimony. If the wife has already initiated: proceedings or if sie were to initiate proceedings for maintenance/pernianeni. alimony. the husband after paying the arnount in terms of the impugned order can plead such payment as afv.extenuating factor in such proceeding.
"The "eontention of the wife that the I-appellate court should nit have reduced compensation is not tenable as the . kappellaté court has assigned valid reasons to reduce the é compensation.
OO
9. Therefore, | am of the considered opinion the order made by I-appellate court does not call for interference... |
10. In the result, I pass the following:-
ORDER.
Criminal Petition No.633/2011 and Criminal. Petition | No.4412/2011 are dismissed. 'Sd/= TUDGE "JUDGE SNN