Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High 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 

Latest Legal News