Husband giving time & money to mother not domestic violence: Court; rejects woman’s appeal

Therefore, she claimed that the couple shifted to a new house in 1993 and their daughter was born. Subsequently, the woman started residing separately with her daughter. The family court dissolved their marriage through an order of January 2014 on the basis of the man’s claim of cruelty meted out to him by his wife, promting him to attempt suicide.

The woman in 2012 had filed a complaint under Section 12 of PWDV Act, against her husband and in-laws alleging mental and physical cruelty. She claimed that after the couple started residing away from the husband’s mother, he would frequently visit his mother and in-laws and her sister-in-law would demand money from the woman’s husband. Therefore, he would allegedly fight with the appellant and when she was pregnant, he had thrown a glass pan fitted in the bathroom and a table fan at her.

The woman had also claimed that when her husband was working abroad between 1996 and 2004, he would send money to his mother. However, the court observed that through her cross-examination, it was revealed that she had withdrawn the amount from his Non-Resident External (NRE) account and had purchased a flat in her name.

The magistrate court had in 2015 rejected her plea seeking protection, residence and monetary relief for herself and her daughter, which she challenged before the sessions court.

Additional sessions judge Ashish Ayachit in his February 8 order noted that the proceeding had been initiated only after her husband had issued her notice demanding divorce and she had made “very vague allegations which do not inspire confidence of truthfulness”. The judge also noted that the woman had not mentioned the details of the incidents of alleged cruelty that took place between 1992 to 2007. “It revealed from the entire evidence that her grievance is that, respondent husband is giving time and money to his mother, which cannot be considered as domestic violence,” the court observed.

Holding the entire evidence by the woman as “unbelievable and untrustworthy”, the court held she “miserably failed to prove domestic violence”.

The court noted that the woman was not entitled to any relief under the PWDV Act and her daughter who resides with her has attained majority and can independently seek remedy under the law. It said there was no infirmity or illegality in magistrate court order and therefore dismissed an appeal.