Court: “Wife Filed False Domestic Violence Petition Just For Grabbing More Money From Husband”

Below is one of the success stories shared by a man from Haryana, whose wife filed false cases on him, only to extort more maintenance money through different sections of the law. Santosh Kumar (name changed) got married to Kavita Kumari (name changed) on February 10, 2010. Husband works at a medical store in Panipat and the woman was a housewife. The couple has a daughter in 2011.

Wife filed Domestic Violence case under Section 12 of Protection Of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 (hereinafter referred to as Act) and here is how the entire matter was tackled by the court.

We are now on Telegram. Follow Us For More Updates

As Narrated By Husband To Men’s Day Out

Allegations (As Submitted By Wife To Court):

Wife has alleged her parents spent Rs 4 Lakhs towards the wedding ceremonies and also gave dowry articles such as ‘valuable clothes and jewellery’. She left her matrimonial home on the next day of marriage because her in-laws taunted her for not bringing a motor cycle, Rs 1 Lakh cash, gold rings, gold chain etc. for the respondents.

According to the wife, she requested her husband and his parents that her family had already spent beyond their capacity and now they were not in a position to fulfil their further demands. At this point in time, the wife alleges being slapped by her in-laws.

We are now on Telegram. Follow Us For More Updates

It has been further averred that when the complainant/applicant went to her parental home first time, she narrated the whole story to her parents, however, in order to maintain peace in their daughter’s matrimonial life, her parents arranged for additional Rs 25,000 and sent her again to her husband’s home.

ALSO READ –

Mohammed Shami’s US Visa Gets Rejected Due to Domestic Violence Case; BCCI Steps In

When the wife was pregnant, the respondents and his family members did not care for her. The woman gave birth to the couple’s daughter Baby Avani (name changed) and according to the wife, all delivery expenses were borne by her parents, despite husband earning Rs 25,000 per month.

According to the woman, Santosh would spend all his earnings since he was an alcoholic and also beat her up frequently. Kavita alleged that she was once again taunted by Santosh’s family for giving birth to a baby girl.

Later, when the couple started living separately, Kavita complained how Santosh’s sister and brother would visit them frequently and abuse and quarrel with her on the instigation of Santosh’s parents. The woman said she was not allowed to meet any other person nor talk to anyone on the telephone.

In January 2013, wife alleged that her husband returned home drunk and pressurised her to fulfil his dowry demands. When wife refused, the man would beat her up telling her how they had also murdered someone else 12-years-ago. Kavita alleged she was threatened to bring the valuables, else Santosh’s family would get her only brother killed.

According to the woman, she narrated the acts of cruelty several times to her parents and also called up police but did not get relief. When she rang up the police again, her husband snatched away their daughter. When all were called to the police station, the husband and his family allegedly admitted their mistake and entered into a ‘compromise’ in presence of the officers.

After taking away her daughter, Kavita returned to her parents’ residence and later the police directed Santosh to take his wife home within 3-4 days. However, instead of bringing the wife home, Santosh filed a case of divorce against his wife in January 2013.

ALSO READ –

Physically-challenged man raises money through crowdfunding for paying alimony to fully-abled wife

It is then the wife filed a complain before Women’s Cell in February 2013 and both parties were summoned at the police station again. Santosh went to Kavita’s home along with his family and assured her to withdraw the divorce petition and bring her back to their place. Yet again, there was a ‘compromise’ between the families.

While Santosh did withdraw the divorce application, he did not bring his wife home. In August 2013, the wife re-approached the police and for the nth time, a ‘compromise’ was made between the parties in September 2013.

Later a panchayat too was convened to resolve the matter between the parties in 2015, where according to the woman Santosh and his family were adamant to bring her back home until their demands were met. Thus, out of no other alternatives left, Kavita filed a domestic violence case seeking relief.

Response By Husband and His Family To The Court

The marriage that took place between parties was a very simple one, and no dowry had been demanded or received. The husband’s family admitted that several panchayats had been convened, however, they counter alleged that it was Kavita instead, who refused to return home, abused Santosh’s family and even threatened them all of false cases by committing suicide.

Santosh alleged that it was him and his family instead who were real victims of cruelty by the woman. The lady had also filed many more cases and applications against the respondents, including under section 498A of the IPC.

She also herself gave statement before the investigation officer of the case as well as court, that she did not want any recovery of her alleged dowry articles given by her family.

We are now on Telegram. Follow Us For More Updates

Observations By The Court (Panipat) Judgement

Honourable judge said that he had heard learned counsel for both the parties and had also gone through the case file very carefully. He said,

Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted while arguing that respondents used to treat the petitioner in a very bad manner as they were not satisfied with the dowry articles brought by her in the marriage.

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents submitted that present petition is based on totally false facts. Actually, petitioner herself left her matrimonial home for no cause and reason. No act of domestic violence was ever committed by respondents upon the petitioner. 

The judge noted how the applicant never complained regarding any dowry demand during her stay with husband. He said,

ALSO READ –

Wife threatening to commit suicide is cruelty to husband: Madras HC

The present application is counter-blast to the divorce petition filed by the husband. The petitioner wife is already getting Rs. 6,000/- from Santosh u/s 125 of Cr.P.C., but petitioner under the misguidance and influence of her parents has filed the present false petition against the respondents after a span of more than two and half years of her leaving the matrimonial home dated January 2013, without any cause and reason.

So the present petition is also liable to be dismissed on the ground of bar of limitation of one year as per section 468 of the Cr.P.C. Infact, she has filed this present false petition just for grabbing money from the respondents. 

The judge further noted how no specific date, month or year of such allegations of demands of dowry had been proven on the case file by the petitioner. Petitioner had herself left the company of her husband, and now on the basis of her one sided statement appended with the domestic incident report, no relief under the domestic violence act as claimed by her in this petition be given to her. In support of the judge’s contentions, learned counsel for respondents also drew the attention of court towards the oral evidence as well as documentary evidence placed on the case file.

Observations On Cruelty & Dowry Demand Allegations

Petitioner has levelled a lot of allegations against the respondents with regard to mental as well as physical cruelty upon her for bringing less dowry in her marriage, but there is not a single piece of evidence from the side of petitioner to corroborate her version. So, when the petitioner has failed to lead any evidence in this regard then the court said it failed to understand on what basis she had levelled specific allegations of demand of dowry against the respondents.

There was not a single piece of evidence on the case file to establish that she was actually maltreated, harassed, tortured or beaten up etc. by the respondents. No sufficient, cogent and convincing evidence has been placed on the case file by the petitioner to show any kind of any alleged domestic violence conducted upon her by the respondents.

ALSO READ –

If false criminal complaint is preferred by either spouse it would indubitably constitute matrimonial cruelty: Bombay HC

The petitioner has also alleged that her father had given a lot of dowry articles to the respondents in her marriage and all of the expenses of the delivery of her child were borne by her parents. However, as discussed above, the petitioner has surprisingly failed to place on record even the list of such dowry articles and the bills/receipts etc. of the hospital where child was born.

The petitioner has also alleged that she was shunted out from her matrimonial home in January 2013, but in her duly sworn testimony, she has deposed that she herself left her matrimonial home.

Observations On Birth Of Baby Girl & Delivery Expenses Borne By Wife’s Family

The wife has specifically alleged that during her pregnancy and after the birth of her daughter, she was subjected to mental as well as physical cruelty by the respondents for giving birth to a female child and even all of the delivery expenses were borne by her parents. However, in her cross-examination, she has specifically stated that after the birth of her daughter, the respondents had organized religious function (jagran) in their home in which her parents had also paid their visit.

She has also stated that the husband had got her delivery conducted XXX Nursing Home. No evidence is led by petitioner to show that all of the delivery expenses were borne by her parents whereas, infact the husband and his family have placed on record medical and doctor reports, which establishes the fact that all of the delivery expenses were borne by the man and not the parents of the petitioner as falsely alleged by her in her petition.

We are now on Telegram. Follow Us For More Updates

No Relief Under Domestic Violence Act

In the considered opinion of this court she is certainly not entitled to get any kind of relief sought by her in this very petition filed by her under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Nothing fruitful has emerged out from the respective cross examinations which could be of any help to case of petitioner, as the onus to establish her case against the respondents was upon the petitioner and in the considered opinion of the court, she has failed to gain the confidence of the court in her favour.

So, final conclusion on the basis of above factors is that there is no incident of any alleged domestic violence committed by respondents upon the petitioner. The court observed,

If there is no domestic violence allegedly committed by respondents upon the petitioner then just with an intention to take monetary relief, share in the property of her husband, securing her safety, compensation or damages etc., petitioner cannot be allowed to invoke the provisions of Domestic Violence Act as a tool to put pressure upon the respondents.

It is time and again seen that provisions which are made for the protection of women to prevent them from destitution and vagrancies in the hand of her husband or in-laws, are very much misused these days. Even Hon’ble Apex court has taken such a view in recent judgments. It is not the case that women are not subjected to cruelty or domestic violence but when more and more numbers of frivolous complaints or petitions are received in the courts then a view develops that the preventive measures passed by Legislation Acts are now a days being used as weapons to pressurize and terrorize the in-laws.

This is not the real motive behind passing these Acts. If such kind of petitions are allowed in a routine manner then the real purpose of law will be defeated.

Court’s Note On Misuse Of Domestic Violence Act

Purpose of passing of Protection Of Woman from Domestic Violence Act was to prevent the women from the incidents of domestic violence. In this Act, domestic violence is given a very wide meaning because it includes financial, mental, physical, social & economical violence etc. Therefore, onus is upon the petitioner to first of all establish that she had been subjected to any kind of domestic violence by the respondents and then only, she can claim any relief under this Act.

ALSO READ –

Court Shows Door To ‘Educated’ ‘Talented’ Wife Who Demanded Rs 3.5 Lakhs As Monthly Interim Maintenance

In the present case, petitioner Kavita, in her petition filed under section 12 of the Act, has levelled many allegations against the respondents like they used to beat her, harass her, maltreat her, abuse her, all of the expenses for her delivery of her baby girl were borne by her parents, she was taunted for bringing less dowry and even shunted out of her matrimonial home in bare three clothes etc.

Another stark reality which has come on record from her cross examination is that she has filed this present petition after making deliberations with her father as she has herself deposed that on returning to her parental house, her father had filed petitions under section 125 Cr.P.C, D.V Act and an FIR for demanding dowry. It implies that all the family members of the petitioner had colluded with each other so as to harass the husband and his family members despite the respondents doing best which they all could do so as to make the petitioner settle down in her matrimonial home.

Further Maintenance Denied

It has also come on record from her cross-examination that the husband is regularly paying the maintenance allowance u/s 125 Cr.P.C to the wife and their minor daughter and this also shows that the husband had never been negligent in his duty towards his wife/petitioner and their minor daughter. The woman also deposed that she had received the summons of the divorce petition and it is also the case of petitioner that the husband had filed divorce petition against her and after this, she has filed this present petition. Court said,

Meaning thereby, it is nothing but a counter-blast petition filed by her just in order to create undue pressure upon the respondents.

ALSO READ –

Court Baffled As Wife Claims To Exhaust Rs 2Cr Alimony in 1.5 Yrs | Demands Rs 5L Monthly Maintenance Again

Besides this, another important aspect which has come on record from the testimonies of both the petitioner Kavita and her father Randheer (name changed), that the petitioner is a qualified lady with an experience of Asha worker and she can join her services whenever she desires so. To this the court said,

Meaning thereby, the petitioner is a competent and a qualified lady as per her own deposition, and when the husband is already regularly and religiously paying her maintenance allowance under Section 125 Cr.P.C, then the wife is certainly not at all entitled to claim any relief under the present petition, in which she has miserably failed to establish her case upto the satisfaction of the court.

ALSO READ –

http://voiceformenindia.com/in-the-law/madhya-pradesh-high-court-order-husband-to-pay-maintenance-under-any-circumstances/

http://voiceformenindia.com/his-story/fake-dowry-harassment-charges-delhi/

http://voiceformenindia.com/in-the-law/mother-files-case-of-economic-abuse-on-husband-and-son/

Follow www.mensdayout.com on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram

We are now on Telegram. Follow Us For More Updates

Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below