Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 283 (MP)

Pancham Singh v. Ranjana Singh

2015-03-10

SUBHASH KAKADE

body2015
ORDER : Subhash Kakade, J. This revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the applicants, here-in-after referred as "the respondents", being aggrieved by the judgment dated 17.06.2013, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 74/2013, by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur (M.P.), dismissing the criminal appeal filed by the respondents under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, here-in-after referred as "the Do. Vio. Act" filed against the order dated 30.01.2013 passed in M.J.C. No. 3/2011 by the learned J.M.F.C. Laundi, District Chhatarpur, allowing the application directed the respondents to pay the amount of Rs. 2000/- per month to the respondent No. 1, here-in-after referred as "the aggrieved person", and Rs. 1000/- per month to her son Shivam @ Om Shiva towards maintenance and also compensation of Rs. 5000/-in lump sum and cost of Rs. 500/-. 2. The aggrieved person had filed an application under the provisions of sections 12, 18, 20, 21 and 22 of the Do. Vio. Act against the respondents on the grounds that 8-10 years ago her marriage was solemnized with Shivram Singh and due to illness he died on 26.03.2009. After the death of her husband, the respondent No. 1 father and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 brothers of her husband used to harass her mentally and committing marpeet with her and her children. The respondents have received the insurance amount of Rs. 1.00 lakh of her husband and have kept stridhan also. Due to this harassment she is living with her parents at her paternal house, though they are not able to maintain her. Therefore she approached for maintenance before the learned J.M.F.C. Laundi. 3. The respondents entered their appearance by filing replies and denied the averments of the aggrieved person and stated that she has filed the said application for maintenance on false and concocted grounds. When aggrieved person was living with the respondents they have fulfilled all her requirements. The share of land of her husband Shivram Singh has also been transferred on her name and while going to parent's house she has taken all her stridhan. The amount of insurance police is deposited in her Bank Account and there is no domestic violence of any kind committed with the aggrieved person and her children. 4. The share of land of her husband Shivram Singh has also been transferred on her name and while going to parent's house she has taken all her stridhan. The amount of insurance police is deposited in her Bank Account and there is no domestic violence of any kind committed with the aggrieved person and her children. 4. Learned J.M.F.C. Court vide above mentioned order allowed the application filed by the aggrieved person. Appeal filed against this order also rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, hence the respondents before this Court by filing this revision. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that learned Courts below grossly erred while exercising jurisdiction vested in them and passed impugned orders which are perverse and contrary both of the facts and the law. Oral as well documentary evidence is not properly appreciated and without availability of reliable evidence, passed the orders. Land which was recorded in the name of her deceased husband legally transferred on her name. The respondents having their own family and liabilities towards their families and weakness of the case of the respondents cannot be a ground for the success of the aggrieved person. The aggrieved person has not filed any affidavit or documentary evidence and has not filed any evidence regarding the income of the respondents, hence impugned order is erroneous. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, gone through the records of the Courts below also gone through the impugned judgments of Courts below, statements of Smt. Ranjana Singh (PW/1) and other witnesses Drigpal Singh (PW/2), Alag Singh (PW/3) her father and brother respectively. Also perused statements of respondent No. 1 Pancham Singh (DW/1), respondent No. 2 Shiv Mohan Singh (DW/2) and other respondents witnesses Babu Singh (DW/3) and Narendra Singh (DW/4) and after consideration of the documents (Exh. D-1 to D-17) exhibited by the respondents, the Court is of the view that no error has been committed by the learned Courts below in awarding the amount of maintenance with compensation and cost amount as mentioned herein above. 7. Learned Courts below rightly come to the conclusion that Smt. Ranjana Singh is aggrieved person. Section 2(a) of the Do. Vio. 7. Learned Courts below rightly come to the conclusion that Smt. Ranjana Singh is aggrieved person. Section 2(a) of the Do. Vio. Act defines the aggrieved person which reads as under:- ___"aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent." 8. Section 2(f) of the Do. Vio. Act defines the domestic relationship which reads as under:-- "domestic relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family." 9. The expression "domestic relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are members of a family living together as a joint family. 10. Combine reading to these definitions goes to show that any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to act of domestic violence by the respondent is an aggrieved person. 11. Any adult male person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person and an aggrieved female living in a relationship in the marriage may file a complaint under the Do. Vio. Act against a relative of the husband or male partner. 12. Domestic relation between aggrieved person Smt. Ranjana Singh and the respondents as relative of her husband is not disputed because, in their reply they have admitted this fact that when Smt. Ranjana Singh was living with them they have fulfilled all her requirements. 13. According to the admissions of the witnesses of both the parties this fact is proved that at present elder son Satyam is living with the respondents. Smt. Ranjana Singh (PW/1) submitted that the respondent does not allow her to meet Satyam. This fact amounts to emotional distress and mental torture caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondents towards the aggrieved person. 14. Smt. Ranjana Singh (PW/1) submitted that the respondent does not allow her to meet Satyam. This fact amounts to emotional distress and mental torture caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondents towards the aggrieved person. 14. As per statements of witnesses, these facts are proved that during illness of Shivram Singh the respondents expended huge amount in his treatment and the amount of Insurance Policy is deposited in the Bank account of Smt. Ranjana Singh. 15. The monetary relief granted under this section shall be adequate, fair and reasonable and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved person is accustomed. 16. The respondent No. 1 Pancham Singh (DW/1) during his cross examination admitted that total share of land of Shivram Singh was three Bighas and some dismal, and this land is mutated in the name of Ranjana Singh and her sons Satyam and Shivam. It can be very well gathered that such small piece of land cannot be maintained a family of three members, coupled with the fact that the aggrieved person is not living in the same village Chandrapura, where the land is situated. 17. While disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12 of the Do. Vio. Act, the Magistrate may direct the respondent to pay monetary relief. In addition to this, the Magistrate may pass an order directing the respondent to pay compensation and cost also to the aggrieved person. This way learned Courts below rightly awarded the compensation amount of Rs. 5,000/- in lump sum with cost of Rs. 500/-. 18. In the result, learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in the facts of the present case has come to the right conclusion that the J.M.F.C. Laundi, District Chhatarpur rightly awarded the maintenance amount as well as amount of compensation and cost from the respondents. The impugned order dated 17.06.2013 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur is legal, proper and correct, and calls for no interference, therefore this revision petition is devoid of any merit, hence is disallowed.