DATE OF JUDGMENT:
20th April 2021
JUDGES:
Justice Manish Pitale and Justice S.S. Shinde
PARTIES:
Vanisha Vincent Rodrigues (Petitioner)
Jyoti Vincent Rodrigues and State of Maharashtra (Respondent)
SUMMARY
In this case, The Bombay High Court subdued a domestic violence case enrolled against a 23-year-old daughter by her mom, taking note that she had been trapped in the crossfire of acrimony and marital disputes between her parents.
AN OVERVIEW
1. In this case, a daughter is looking for suppression of procedures started by her mother under the arrangements of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, guaranteeing that she is confronting the fury of her mother because of marital disagreement between her mother and her father.
2. According to the Petitioner, she has been superfluously hauled into the said procedures and that this is detrimentally affecting her profession as likewise her possibilities of concentrating abroad.
3. The mother of the Petitioner has documented an application under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20, and 22 of the D.V. Act against her husband. It is expressed in the said application recorded before the Magistrate that there is marital disunity between the Respondent and her husband.
4. An interim order was passed by the learned Magistrate against the husband of Respondent. The said request has been tested via bid by him along with the Petitioner before the Sessions Court.
5. The Petitioner has documented the current request expressing that the procedures under the D.V. Act were started by her when the Petitioner was in the last year of her Engineering course. The Petitioner has presented that she has finished her Engineering course and she intends to attempt further investigations in Australia, for which she has effectively initiated the process.
6. According to the Petitioner, in the application and structures that are needed to be filled while looking for Visa before the Australian authorities, a presentation is to be given in regards to the pendency of criminal arguments against the Applicant. Pendency of the said continuing started under the D.V. Act by her mother are making obstacles for the Petitioner to effectively look for Visa to visit Australia for undertaking higher studies.
7. In these conditions, the Petitioner has documented the current writ petition looking for suppression of the said procedures forthcoming before the Magistrate under the DV Act, to the extent that she is concerned.
ISSUES
The following was analyzed by the court - Whether proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act against the daughter by mother can be initiated?
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
1. Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005: States the application to the magistrate.
2. Section 18 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005: Provides the protection orders.
3. Section 19 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005: Provides the residence orders.
4. Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005: Provides Monetary reliefs.
5. Section 22 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005: Provides compensation orders.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
1. The decision by Justices S Shinde and Manish Pitale went ahead with a request by the 23-year-old daughter saying she is confronting her mother's fury for remaining with her father.
2. She is scheduled to go to Australia for seeking after master in engineering course beginning in May, however, the pendency of the case makes obstacles for her to get her visa, her advocate Kenny Thakkar submitted.
3. The honorable judges noticed that the mother had recorded a DV case against the father as well. Although she charged the daughter, there was just a single claim against her. The mother's answer said it isn't required for the daughter to travel to another country for additional studies and she is blaming this to stay away from lawful procedures. She likewise offered expressions on the daughter's character saying she has numerous boyfriends.
4. "The petitioner is a young woman who has quite recently graduated and her future relies on how she can improve her instructive capabilities and build up her character… Amazingly, her mother is recklessly determined bowed after making obstacles in her advancement," Justice Pitale composed for the bench.
5. It gives the idea that the single claim of attack against the daughter is a distortion, and a consequence of outrage as she kept on remaining with her father, the appointed authorities said. There isn't anything to demonstrate the veracity or even validity of the photos attached. "In any case, the tenor of the answer shows that the respondent (mother) isn't decidedly arranged towards her daughter and it is therefore that she has evened out claims against her daughter relating to her character. We don't wish to remark on something similar. However, it is clear that the petitioner is trapped in the crossfire of asperity and marital strife between the respondent and her husband, who is the father of the petitioner," said the bench.
6. The appointed authorities inferred that in the facts and conditions of the case the claim, borne out of conjugal friction, can be supposed to be impossible and fall under a class of SC's judgment in the Bhajan Lal case where it laid classifications where HC can suppress procedures. They coordinated suppression of the DV argument forthcoming against the daughter under the steady gaze of the magistrate's court.
CONCLUSION
The Court presumed that the claim evened out by the mother against the daughter are overstated and her indignation and harshness emerging from marital disagreement with her husband is prompting genuine obstacle in the advancement of her daughter, the petitioner. The charges are 'silly and characteristically unlikely based on which no reasonable individual could arrive at an equitable resolution that there is adequate ground for continuing against the blamed, the Court finished up. It, consequently, suppressed the procedures started by the mother against the daughter.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
