In The High Court of Nainital CC.... Of..... 2018

In the High Court of Nainital
CC.... of..... 2018
In the matter of
Megha Mehta W/o Nirmal Mehta R/o 211, Panditwari Phase II, Dehradun. ..........Complaiant
v/s.
Nirmal Mehta S/o Navin Mehta, R/o /o 211, Panditwari Phase II, Dehradun. .......Respondent
1. This application under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic

Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) is filed by the applicant above named along
with her minor son Moinul Hoque seeking reliefs of protection order under section 18
of the Act and monetary relief under section 20 of the Act against the respondent
above named. The application is treated to be filed by the applicant only, as the Act
permits only an aggrieved person, defined in section 2 (a) of the Act, to file an
application under section 12 of the Act.
2. The applicant in her application, inter alia, narrated that she got married to the
respondent on 17-5-1998 and since then started to reside in the matrimonial home.
After one year of her marriage the respondent started to torture her, subjected her to
domestic violence, coerced her to bring money from her father for construction of a
house wherein the applicant is presently residing, stopped providing her and her son
any maintenance.
3. particularly on 12-9-2010 the respondent mercilessly beat her, poured kerosene on her
to set her on fire. It is further stated that the father of the applicant is maintaining her
and her minor son all along since the respondent stopped providing any maintenance
to them. Though the applicant prayed for ex parte order also, this court deemed it fit
to hear the respondent and finally dispose of the application.
4. The respondent, after receiving notice, appeared in court and vide order dated 29-3-
2011 he was allowed to be represented by his learned counsel Mr. H.N. Islam as the
respondent is in active service in CRPF an presently posted at Orissa. The respondent
filed written statement through his learned counsel. In a nutshell, the respondent
denied the allegation of torture, violence, demand of dowry, refusal to pay
maintenance etc.
5. The applicant approached this court directly without first going to the Protection
officer concerned and therefore no domestic incident report is annexed with the
application.
6. In view of section 28 of the Act, Rule 6(5) of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Rules, 2006, section 126 (2) and section 254 (1) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CrPC’) summons procedure was followed and
the parties were directed to adduce their evidence.
7. The applicant, in support of her case, examined 2 (two) witnesses i.e. the applicant
herself and her father.
8. As laid down in Rule 6 (5) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Rules, 2006 the procedure enumerated for deciding a case under section 125 CrPC is
to be followed to decide an application under section 12 of the Act and for that reason
section 354(6) CrPC would be applicable.
9. Therefore the following points arise for determination in this case.
(A) Whether the applicant is entitled for relief of protection order under section 18
of the Act against the respondent?
(B) Whether the applicant is entitled for monetary relief under section 20 of the
Act against the respondent?
10. The learned counsel for the applicant Megha Mehta Mehta contended that the
aggrieved woman was harassed, tortured and she has been made to live in abject
poverty due to the neglect of the respondent. The father of the aggrieved woman is
looking after her but with his megre income he is also facing great difficulty in
providing her maintenance. He further contended that the applicant side has been able
to clearly prove the case that domestic violence was committed and the respondent
has refused to maintain the applicant and her son. Therefore the applicant is entitled to
get the reliefs claimed for.
Prayer
It is most respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court mey be pleased to:
Pass all such orders as deem fit and proper under section 18, 20,22 of Protection of domestic
violence act;
Hon’ble court may please to direct the respondent to pay amount of Rs. 5 lakhs compensation
for damage under protection of domestic violence act 2005.
Verification:
I, the above named deponent do hereby verify on oath that contents of para No. 1 and 10 of
my above application are true and correct to my personal knowledge. Nothing material has
been concealed therein and no part thereof is false.
So help me God.
DEPONENT

In The High Court of Nainital CC.... Of..... 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In The High Court of Nainital CC.... Of..... 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In The High Court of Nainital CC.... Of..... 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In the High Court of Nainital

CC.... of..... 2018

1. This application under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic

You might also like