Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Collector’s Appointment of Ex-Serviceman as Lambardar: Preference for Service to the State Valid Tax to Be Computed at 100% Under DTVSV Act, Rejects Inclusion of Belated Grounds in Disputed Tax: Bombay High Court Petitioner’s Father Did Not Fall Within Definition of Enemy – Kerala High Court Quashes Land Classification Under Enemy Property Act Calcutta High Court Upholds Cancellation of LPG Distributor LOI for Violating Guidelines Recording 'Reasons to Believe' is a Mandatory Safeguard, Not a Mere Formality Under PMLA: P&H High Court Illegality Is Incurable, Unauthorized Constructions Cannot Be Regularized: Bombay High Court Kerala High Court Quashes Tribunal’s Order Granting Retrospective UGC Benefits to Librarians Without Required Qualifications Order XLI Rule 27 CPC | No Evidence Can Be Admitted Beyond Pleadings, And Additional Evidence Cannot Be Allowed Merely To Fill Lacunae: Jharkhand High Court Quashing | Mere Heated Exchanges Over Loan Repayment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Supreme Court Prisoner Transfers Must Prioritize Security and Prevent Gang Violence: Supreme Court Restores Intra-State Transfer Order Jurisdiction Under Section 100 CPC Is Conditional Upon Framing Substantial Questions of Law: Supreme Court Panchayat Election | Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Bar on Judicial Review During Election Process Encroachment Allegation Requires Concrete Evidence, Not Mere Surmises: Bombay High Court Dismisses Plea for Disqualification of Sarpanch Order Denying Permission for Peaceful Protest Rally Set Aside: Calcutta High Court Prolonged Custody Alone Cannot Justify Bail In Cases Involving Heinous Crimes: Delhi High Court Body Shaming and Sexually Colored Remarks Are Unacceptable In A Civilized Society: Kerala High Court No Mandatory Injunction Where Failure to Prove Ownership and Possession: Punjab and Haryana High Court Supreme Court Dismisses Article 32 Petition Seeking Declaration of Bombay High Court Judgment as Illegal Specific Relief Act | Power to Extend Time Under Section 28 Is Discretionary and Must Be Exercised Prudently: Supreme Court

SUBSEQUENT DIVORCE NOT ABSOLVED LIABILITY FOR PAST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE - AWARDS MAINTENANCE – BOMB. HC

06 September 2024 5:16 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the honorable G. A. Sanap, J., has pronounced that divorced Muslim women are entitled to maintenance under the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, even after the dissolution of their marriage. The judgment reaffirms the principle that a subsequent divorce does not absolve the liability of the respondent for past domestic violence offenses.

"The literal construction of the provisions shows that even women who were in a past relationship are entitled to invoke the provisions of the D.V. Act."

The court held that "an act of domestic violence once committed, subsequent decree of divorce will not absolve the liability of the respondent from the offence committed or to deny the benefit to which the aggrieved person is entitled under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005." This landmark ruling ensures that divorced Muslim women can seek relief, including monetary support, child custody, compensation, and interim orders, under the Domestic Violence Act.

The judgment also addressed the issue of the maintenance quantum. The court observed that the husband, a chemical engineer working in Saudi Arabia, had suppressed his actual income during the proceedings. The wife, who had cohabited with the husband for nearly 11 years in Saudi Arabia, presented evidence of their high standard of living. The court stated that the wife is entitled to maintain the lifestyle and standard she was accustomed to while staying with her husband. It quantified the maintenance at 25% of the husband's net salary, taking into account the adverse inference drawn against him for suppressing evidence.

The decision cites several precedents to support its conclusions. It relies on the case of Atmaram Narayan Sanap Vs. Sangita Atmaram Sanap, where the court emphasized that even after divorce, an aggrieved person can file a proceeding under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act for past domestic violence. Additionally, the court refers to the case of Smt. Bharati Naik v. Shri Ravi Ramnath and Halarnkar, which establishes that the definition of "aggrieved person" includes past relationships.

This judgment has far-reaching implications for divorced Muslim women who have experienced domestic violence. It recognizes their rights and provides a legal avenue for seeking maintenance and other necessary reliefs. The ruling not only upholds the principles of gender justice but also ensures that divorced Muslim women can lead dignified lives.

Date of Decision: 09/06/2023

Ahsanullah @ Javed Khan vs  Shahana Parvin 

Similar News