The sessions court at Dindoshi upheld a 2015 order of a magistrate rejecting the wife’s complaint that the husband suppressed the mental illness of her mother-in-law.
In a recent adjudication, a Mumbai court exonerated an individual charged under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act). The court’s ruling established that actions undertaken by a husband in support of his mother, including but not limited to spending time with her and offering financial aid, do not meet the threshold for constituting domestic violence against his wife.
The endorsement of this verdict by Additional Sessions Judge Ashish Ayachit, presiding at Dindoshi in Mumbai, upheld the magistrate’s prior decision to dismiss the complaint lodged by the wife. This complaint alleged breaches of the DV Act by her husband.
The complaint, submitted for adjudication, delineated instances wherein subsequent to the couple’s establishment of a separate residence apart from the husband’s mother, the husband sustained regular visits to his maternal relative, who, in turn, solicited financial support from him.
“It revealed from the entire evidence that her grievance is that the husband is giving time and money to his mother, which cannot be considered as domestic violence” the sessions court noted.
The matrimonial bond between the parties was solemnized in May 1992 and subsequently dissolved via divorce in January 2014. Following the dissolution, the wife lodged a complaint alleging instances of both mental and physical cruelty perpetrated by her husband and his family members.
Additionally, the wife contended that during the period of her husband’s overseas employment from 1996 to 2004, he regularly provided financial support to his mother. Subsequently, the wife sought judicial recourse by instigating proceedings before the magistrate court. Within her petition, she sought protective measures, residential arrangements, and pecuniary support.
Nevertheless, the magistrate’s ruling was adverse to her assertions, prompting an appeal before the sessions court. Upon appellate review, the sessions court noted the temporal coincidence between the commencement of legal proceedings and the service of a divorce notice by the husband.
“The wife had withdrawn money from the Non-Resident External (NRE) account and purchased a flat in her name. She made very vague allegations which does not inspire confidence or truthfulness. Thus, the allegations that he was not providing any financial help to the wife, cannot be accepted as she herself admitted that she withdrew amount,” the Court said.
Upon examination, the sessions court opted not to interfere with the trial court’s judgment, citing insufficient substantiation of the wife’s claims of domestic violence.
