Whether the court can refuse to grant maintenance to wife if divorce decree was granted on the ground of desertion?

 In the case of Rohtash Singh (supra), the marriage was dissolved on the ground of desertion. The prayer made by the wife for maintenance was opposed on this ground. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the wife is entitled to claim the maintenance from former husband, if she cannot maintain herself and remains unmarried. It is held that the decree of divorce granted on the ground of desertion in favour of the husband cannot be treated as a bar to the wife to claim the maintenance from the husband as a divorced woman. In my view, the law laid down is a complete answer to the submissions advanced on this point by the learned advocate for the respondent. I, therefore, conclude that merely because of the decree of divorce on the ground of desertion and cruelty, the husband would not be absolved of his duty to pay the maintenance to the wife under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. {Para 14}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)

Criminal Revision No. 216 of 2019

Decided On: 12.01.2023

Amit Vs. Rita

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

G.A. Sanap, J.

Citation: MANU/MH/0103/2023.

Print Page

Whether wife can give up her right to claim money,ornaments or future maintenance in divorce proceeding?

 Regarding the contention that parties have voluntarily

agreed to relinquish the various benefits and claims, I am unable to

agree.         The joint application for divorce contains a unilateral

undertaking by the wife that she will not claim money, ornaments or

future maintenance.        There is nothing to show that this was in

consideration for a mutually satisfactory settlement of all the

existing claims. In such circumstances, it can only be treated as

consent obtained from the wife either by coercion or obtained by

compulsion of circumstances or as a condition imposed on a

desperate wife by the husband for consenting to a divorce.          Of

course, parties are free to enter into a satisfactory settlement of all

their claims, on mutually agreed terms. However, contracting out

of the statutory rights conferred on the wife under section 19 to 22

of D.V Act is against public policy and hence cannot be recognized,

unless it is proved that there was a mutually satisfactory settlement

of all claims. This view is fortified by the settled legal position

under section 3 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence

Act, 2005 and under section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT:

            MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

    13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016

                   Crl.MC.No. 2990 of 2016

           BIPIN, V  MEERA D.S.,
          Citation: 2017 CRL1171 Kerala

Print Page

Whether Decree of divorce absolve husband from liability under Domestic Violence Act?

Deciding a case of domestic violence, where the decree of divorce had been obtained subsequently, 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 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) including monetary relief under Section 20, Child Custody under Section 21, Compensation under Section 22 and interim or ex parte order under Section 23 of the DV Act. 

In the present case, the appellant obtained an ex parte ‘Khula’ from Mufti under the Muslim Personal Law on 09.05.2008 and filed a petition under Section 12 of the DV Act on 29.09.2009 alleging that the respondent was not providing maintenance to her and her child under Sections 8 to 23 of the DV Act. The bench of Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya and S.A. Bobde, JJ, considering the fact that the respondent had challenged the ex parte ‘Khula’ and had filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, held that it cannot be concluded that the decree of divorce was granted on 09.05.2008.

Moreover, the Court was of the opinion that even if after obtaining the decree of divorce, the wife who had shared the household in the past but was no longer residing with the husband, can file a petition under Section 12 of the DV Act if subjected to domestic violence seeking relief under Section 18 to 23 of the DV Act. In the present case, where the parties were represented by Shilpa Singh and KC Dua, the alleged domestic violence took place between January, 2006 and September, 2007. Hence, the Court held that even if it is accepted that the appellant had obtained ex parte ‘Khula’ under the Muslim Personal Law from the Mufti on 09.05.2008, the petition under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was maintainable.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 2069 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 8056 of 2013)

Decided On: 18.09.2014

Juveria Abdul Majid Patni
Vs.
Atif Iqbal Mansoori

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya and Sharad Arvind Bobde, JJ.

Print Page