scorecardresearch
Follow Us:
Thursday, January 21, 2021

Domestic violence: Chandigarh court summons Delhi magistrate on Feb 1 next year

The Chandigarh court, however, had passed an interim protection order in 2014, granting relief to the woman, restraining all the accused from committing any act of domestic violence.

Written by Jagpreet Singh Sandhu | Chandigarh | Updated: December 10, 2020 10:56:57 am
chandigarh domestic violence case, domestic violence case against delhi magistrate, Delhi News, indian expressThe proceedings of the case are still pending in a Chandigarh court.

The Chandigarh court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) has summoned the magistrate of a Delhi court to stand trial under Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, for non-compliance with an order passed in 2014 over allegations of domestic violence filed by his wife.

The court of T P S Randhawa, ACJM, Chandigarh, has summoned the Delhi magistrate to appear on February 1, 2021.

The complaint has been filed by the magistrate’s wife under sections 31 (2) and 32 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act read with Rule 15 (4) and (7) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence, Rules 2006, for intentional breach of interim protection order, dated April 5, 2014.

The complainant alleged that she suffered domestic violence at the hands of the accused family, including his parents and brother. She filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act after she was physically and emotionally abused and was turned out of the matrimonial house in Delhi.

The proceedings of the case are still pending in a Chandigarh court.

The Chandigarh court, however, had passed an interim protection order in 2014, granting relief to the woman, restraining all the accused from committing any act of domestic violence; restraining all the accused from denying access and residence to the complainant in the matrimonial house; and further restraining husband of woman (accused) from renouncing his rights in the shared house besides granting interim financial orders in the shape of consolidated maintenance charges. For this, an assurance was given by the accused that no domestic violence will be committed against the complainant and she will be provided with amenities in the shared household.

As per the order, the complainant and the accused had the address of shared household in their Aadhaar cards.
However, the accused with an intention to relinquish his rights in the shared household had mischievously changed his address in his new Aadhaar card, which amounts to violation of the interim protection order passed in 2014, which is an offence under Section 31 of the Act.

The ACJM held that “…The order dated 05/04/2014 is still existing and subsisting and has not been modified or altered as of date…”

Referring to a judgment of the Supreme Court, mentioning Satish Chander Ahuja vs Sneha Ahuja, the ACJM stated that the residence of the accused is very much covered under the definition of shared household and it is manifest that the accused (husband) has attempted to relinquish his rights in the said shared household by changing his address in the Aadhaar card.

Thus, the ACJM said that prima facie, a case is made out under Section 31 of the Act against the accused (husband). However, there is no prima facie evidence against the remaining accused. Therefore, no ground is made out to summon the other accused. Hence, the complaint against other accused is dismissed, and the accused no 1 (husband) is ordered to be summoned to stand trial under Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Chandigarh News, download Indian Express App.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement