• Home
  • Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
Monday, July 4, 2022
  • Login
  • Home
  • Law
    • Accident Law
    • Business Law
      • Copyright Law
      • Real Estate Law
    • Child Law
    • Women Law
    • Criminal law
    • Family law
    • International Law
      • Cyber law
      • Traffic law
  • Attorney
  • Divorce
  • Legal Advice
No Result
View All Result
Law Hery
  • Home
  • Law
    • Accident Law
    • Business Law
      • Copyright Law
      • Real Estate Law
    • Child Law
    • Women Law
    • Criminal law
    • Family law
    • International Law
      • Cyber law
      • Traffic law
  • Attorney
  • Divorce
  • Legal Advice
No Result
View All Result
Law Hery
No Result
View All Result
Home Divorce

Once Divorce Is Granted, Relief Can’t Be Sought Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay HC [Read Judgment]

Stanley Paul by Stanley Paul
December 27, 2021
in Divorce
0 0
0
Once Divorce Is Granted, Relief Can’t Be Sought Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay HC [Read Judgment]
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

The Bombay High Court has held that once a decree of divorce has been granted, relief cannot be sought using the spouse under the Domestic Violence Act.Once Divorce Is Granted, Relief Can't Be Sought Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay HC [Read Judgment] 1 Justice MG Giratkar was listening to a criminal revision software filed using a forty two-year-antique lady from Nagpur who challenged a judgment of the Judicial Magistrate First Class dated August 20, 2015. In the stated judgment, the applicant spouse’s utility beneath Sections 12 and 18 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 became rejected.

Article Summary show
Case Background
Judgment

Case Background

The applicant got married to the respondent’s husband on July 15, 1999. The couple had children, but the respondent’s husband filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights earlier than the own family court. However, the matter turned amicably settled, and they began dwelling collectively again. Thereafter, the respondent transformed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights right into a divorce petition beneath Section thirteen of the Hindu Marriage Act. Family Court allowed the stated petition and granted divorce on June 30, 2008.

In 2009, the software below Sections 12 and 18 of the DV Act was filed through the applicant alleging home violence on the part of the respondent’s husband. The said utility become resisted with the aid of the respondent at the floor that at the time of filing software, there was no home relation. She turned into not dwelling with him. She became not a spouse, given the divorce granted. Therefore, her application is prone to be rejected.
The JMFC, Nagpur, disregarded the stated utility by way of the judgment dated August 20, 2015. An attraction becomes filed earlier than the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, who also recorded in his findings that there has been no home dating and, consequently, the applicant isn’t always entitled to alleviation beneath the DV Act.

Judgment

Adv AA Ghonge seemed on behalf of the applicant, and Adv RN Sen appeared for the respondent’s husband.
George submitted that even though her consumer is a divorcee, she is entitled to relief beneath the stated Act. She positioned heavy reliance on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Juveria Abdul Majid Patni vs. Atif Iqbal Mansoori and Anr.

However, the court clarified that another bench of the Supreme Court had checked out the stated judgment in Inderjit Singh Grewal vs. State of Punjab and Anr. In the stated case, the apex court found that domestic violence passed off, and an FIR turned into registered below S.498A and 406 of IPC towards the husband and his spouse and children. Then the wife obtained an ex parte “khula” (divorce) below the Muslim Personal Law from the Mufti and filed a petition under S. 12 of the DV Act subsequently. The apex court held that the spouse’s petition is maintainable.

In the present example, the court docket discovered-

“In the prevailing case, the applicant is not the wife from the date of the decree of divorce, i.E. From 30th June 2008 and, consequently, there’s no courting as husband and wife among them on the time of submitting of the application.” After analyzing some other judgments of the excessive court, Justice Giratkar referred to-
“There is no dispute that the applicant/wife isn’t any extra spouse from the selection of own family Court in dated thirtieth June 2008. The said selection is not set apart utilizing the appellate Court to date. Therefore, it’s far clean that at the time of submitting a petition under the provisions of DV Act within the yr 2009, the applicant was now not the wife and, consequently, the petition itself turned into no longer maintainable.”

Finally, regarding a judgment of the Delhi High Court inside the case of Harbans Lal Malik vs. Payal Malik, the court stated- “In the existing case, there has been no domestic relation on the date of submitting of the application under the DV Act and, consequently, the applicant/wife isn’t always entitled for any protection under the said Act.”

Stanley Paul

Stanley Paul

Passionate beer specialist. Hardcore entrepreneur. Food expert. Social media aficionado. Garnered an industry award while licensing dust in Fort Lauderdale, FL. Spoke at an international conference about marketing yard waste for the government. Earned praise for developing cabbage for fun and profit. Spent the better part of the 90's working on barbie dolls with no outside help. Spent a year writing about shaving cream in Hanford, CA. At the moment I'm buying and selling cod in Ocean City, NJ.

Next Post
Mental cruelty in divorce cases depend of inference: HC

Mental cruelty in divorce cases depend of inference: HC

No Result
View All Result

Latest Updates

How to Use Copyright Check to Protect Your Work

How to Use Copyright Check to Protect Your Work

June 30, 2022
China Child Law and the Future of China

China Child Law and the Future of China

July 4, 2022
Business Law Firm Martin Powers & Counsel Launches in Dallas

Business Law Firm Martin Powers & Counsel Launches in Dallas

June 25, 2022
Internal-outside co-operation in defensive IP rights

Internal-outside co-operation in defensive IP rights

June 25, 2022
Changes on validity of the undisclosed assure of a public company

Changes on validity of the undisclosed assure of a public company

June 25, 2022

Popular Today

  • Larry Waks, Attorney Who Rep’d Clooney Tequila, Joins Foley Gardere

    Larry Waks, Attorney Who Rep’d Clooney Tequila, Joins Foley Gardere

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Bread & Kaya: 2018 Malaysia Cyber-law and IT Cases PT2 – Cyber-defamation

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • ‘It’s hard to agree with’: Family describes call with semi motive force after fiery I-70 crash

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • B.C. Attorney General David Eby to keep AMA on Reddit

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Activist On Women’s Rights In Saudi Arabia

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Home
  • Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
Mail us: admin@Lawhery.com

© 2022 LawHery - All Rights Reserved To Us!

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Law
    • Accident Law
    • Business Law
      • Copyright Law
      • Real Estate Law
    • Child Law
    • Women Law
    • Criminal law
    • Family law
    • International Law
      • Cyber law
      • Traffic law
  • Attorney
  • Divorce
  • Legal Advice

© 2022 LawHery - All Rights Reserved To Us!

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In