Many thanks for your kind response to my doubts on certain issues under PW D.V. Act 2005. In this connection I would like to put forth my views further.
- The very purpose of D V Act – 2005 is to come to rescue of the “aggrieved person” who is in distress and it is intended to come to her rescue instantly (as it is intended to be disposed off within 60 days) and to reimburse all the losses and matrimonial expenses to the “aggrieved person”.
- In this context, the purpose and definition of “monetary relief” u/s 20(i) of the P.W. D.V. Act 2005 will have to be looked into. The monetary reliefs are of the following kinds.
- Monetary Relief
- Compensation
- Reimbursement
- Alimony
- Maintenance
- A plain reading of Sec 20 (i) of the D.V. Act 2005 says that it is intended to “reimburse” certain losses incurred by the “aggrieved person” and obviously in a temporary in nature.
- The sub clause (d) of Sec 20 of the Act also provides for grant of maintenance u/s 125 of the Cr.P.C. But the grant of “ Maintenance” to the children of the “aggrieved person” u/s 125 of the Cr.P.C will have to be dealt on a separate platform and by Family Court Only.
- This is so because if the violence physical or otherwise is proved , it will have to be dealt u/s 498 (a) of the Cr.P.C only and it can not be dealt under the provisions of P.W.D.V. Act 2005.
Likewise grant of “maintenance” to the children u/s 125 of the Cr.P.C can not be invoked when it was proved that all charges of Domestic Violence against the applicant are not proved and she ceases to be an “aggrieved person” as provided under sec (3) of the P.W D.V.Act 2005.
The very provision of Sec 125 of Cr.PC has many fetters to grant the maintenance to the children . The applicant should establish that “she” has been deserted by her husband and she “on her own” and for un-known reasons has not come out of her matrimonial house. Any kind of maintenance cannot be granted so long as the “marriage “ is*xisting
6) Under the circumstances and reasons stated above , I am of the opinion that any orders passed under P.W. D.V. Act 2005being in the nature of “ reimbursement” and quite temporary in nature and there is no judicial separation etc. The orders are coterminous with the judgment and or the “relief” or reimbursement are only concurrent till the judgment.
I shall be much obliged for an early response please.
