-
by sayum
10 June 2026 2:35 PM
In a significant ruling, the High Court of Delhi, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal, set aside the judgment of the Appellate Court in the case of Sapna Paul vs. Rohin Paul (CRL.REV.P. 224/2021). The Appellate Court had previously remanded a domestic violence case back to the Trial Court, a decision that the High Court found to be without proper justification.
Justice Amit Bansal observed, "The order of remand is completely cryptic and without giving any reasons justifying the remand." This observation was central to the High Court's decision to overturn the Appellate Court’s judgment, emphasizing the need for clarity and justification in judicial decisions, especially in cases of domestic violence.
The original case filed by the petitioner, Sapna Paul, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, involved allegations of domestic violence and claims for maintenance and compensation. The Trial Court had granted her a monthly maintenance of Rs.1,00,000 and compensation of Rs.5,00,000. However, the Appellate Court's decision to remand the case for a re-trial was deemed inappropriate by the High Court due to the lack of specific findings on crucial issues raised during the appeal.
Highlighting the lapse in the appellate process, Justice Bansal pointed out that "the entire record was there before the Appellate Court for it to decide the appeal on merits. There was no justification at all to remand the case back to the Trial Court."
In a move to provide immediate relief as intended by the DV Act, the High Court directed the Appellate Court to adjudicate the appeal on merits. Additionally, considering the Husband's net average income based on his income tax returns from 2009-2010 to 2019-2020, the High Court fixed an interim maintenance of Rs.50,000 per month to be paid by Rohin Paul to Sapna Paul, starting from December 2009 to November 2019.
Date of Decision: 19 January, 2024
SAPNA PAUL Vs ROHIN PAUL
