application filed by the respondent wife before trial Court is somewhat
vague. The relevancy of the documents which are sought, is not
explained, but at the same time if one has regard to the nature of
documents which are sought to be produced, those pertain to Sales Tax
and Income Tax Returns of the business of the present petitioners.
Needless to say that as the proceedings are under Domestic Violence
Act and respondent wife is claiming various reliefs therein including that
of maintenance and also provision for residence, in order to decide the
quantum of maintenance, these documents are helpful not only to the
respondent wife, but also to the court as they will depict financial status
of the petitioners' family. Therefore, relevancy of these documents
cannot be disputed even if not expressly pleaded.
6. It may be true that petitioner No.1 being husband is alone
liable to provide maintenance to respondent wife, but even the financial
position of his parents and his family as such is required to be taken into
consideration for deciding the quantum of maintenance. If the petitioner
No.1 and his family is having several businesses and income therefrom,
then, production of income tax and Sales Tax returns of his businesses
will be relevant for assessing the quantum of maintenance and other
reliefs like provision of residence or compensation as may be asked by
the respondent wife.
7. As regards the procedure, section 28(2) of the Domestic
Violence Act, makes it clear that the procedure has to be liberal and not
necessarily the one as prescribed by the provisions of Code of Criminal
Procedure and therefore, that cannot come in the way of the trial Court in
arriving at just and proper decision of the case and for that purpose
directing the petitioners to produce documents. The order passed by the
trial Court also makes it clear that the petitioners are directed to produce
copies of documents of Sales Tax and Income Tax Returns in respect of
“their business firms”, therefore, it is not necessary that the petitioners
should produce all the documents, as prayed in the application with this
clarification, in my considered opinion, no interference is warranted in
the impugned order of the trial court.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1953 OF 2015.
Mr. Prasad Janardan Kurade,
V/s.
Mrs. Nikita Prasad Kurade
CORAM : DR. SHALINI PHANSALKARJOSHI, J.
DATE : 13th JANUARY, 2016.
Citation: 2016 ALLMR(CRI)2300
1. By this petition, original respondents are challenging the
order passed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court,
directing them to produce copies of the documents of SalesTax and
Income Tax, in respect of their business firms, as prayed by the original
applicant vide her Application Exh.11.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the
application filed by respondent wife before trial Court at Exh.11 was
itself vague. The marriage has taken place in the year 2012. But the
Income Tax assessment returns are called from the year 2010-11. It I is
also not stated in the application as to how these documents are relevant.
Moreover, respondent wife, at the most, can ask for documents relating
to income tax of the respondent No.1, her husband, but not the
documents pertaining to the income of respondent Nos 2 & 3. It is
further submitted that the procedure applicable for proceeding under
Domestic Violence Act, as per section 28 of the Act is laid down in Code
of Criminal Procedure and there is no provision in the Code of Criminal
Code, to call upon opposite party to produce documents. Lastly, it is
submitted that the relevancy of documents is neither explained nor it is
stated what efforts were made by the applicant wife to secure copies of
those documents. Hence according to learned counsel for petitioners, the
impugned order passed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate
Court is required to be quashed and set aside.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent wife has
submitted that after the impugned order was passed, the present
petitioners have sought time before the trial Court, for production of
those documents on the grounds that they are in possession of C.A. In
such circumstances when the petitioner has submitted himself to the said
order, there is no question of raising challenge. It is submitted that these
documents are relevant for the purpose of deciding financial status of the
petitioner No.1 husband and his family. Respondent wife cannot get
those documents as they are in possession of the petitioner No.1 and his
family. Moreover, the impugned order, passed by the trial Court
directing petitioner to produce those documents, according to learned
counsel for respondent, is not only interlocutory but legal and correct,
hence no interference is warranted therein.
4. As regards procedure it is submitted that Section 28 sub
clause (2) of the Domestic Violence Act, gives liberty and discretion to
the Magistrate to have his own procedure and therefore, it is not
necessary that the procedure laid down in Criminal Procedure Code only
should be followed.
5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions
advanced at bar and also perused the impugned order passed by the trial
Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court. It is true that the
application filed by the respondent wife before trial Court is somewhat
vague. The relevancy of the documents which are sought, is not
explained, but at the same time if one has regard to the nature of
documents which are sought to be produced, those pertain to Sales Tax
and Income Tax Returns of the business of the present petitioners.
Needless to say that as the proceedings are under Domestic Violence
Act and respondent wife is claiming various reliefs therein including that
of maintenance and also provision for residence, in order to decide the
quantum of maintenance, these documents are helpful not only to the
respondent wife, but also to the court as they will depict financial status
of the petitioners' family. Therefore, relevancy of these documents
cannot be disputed even if not expressly pleaded.
6. It may be true that petitioner No.1 being husband is alone
liable to provide maintenance to respondent wife, but even the financial
position of his parents and his family as such is required to be taken into
consideration for deciding the quantum of maintenance. If the petitioner
No.1 and his family is having several businesses and income therefrom,
then, production of income tax and Sales Tax returns of his businesses
will be relevant for assessing the quantum of maintenance and other
reliefs like provision of residence or compensation as may be asked by
the respondent wife.
7. As regards the procedure, section 28(2) of the Domestic
Violence Act, makes it clear that the procedure has to be liberal and not
necessarily the one as prescribed by the provisions of Code of Criminal
Procedure and therefore, that cannot come in the way of the trial Court in
arriving at just and proper decision of the case and for that purpose
directing the petitioners to produce documents. The order passed by the
trial Court also makes it clear that the petitioners are directed to produce
copies of documents of Sales Tax and Income Tax Returns in respect of
“their business firms”, therefore, it is not necessary that the petitioners
should produce all the documents, as prayed in the application with this
clarification, in my considered opinion, no interference is warranted in
the impugned order of the trial court. Hence Writ Petition stands
dismissed.
[DR. SHALINI PHANSALKARJOSHI, J.]
No comments:
Post a Comment