LexS. VIJIKUMARI versus MOWNESHWARACHARI C
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 45 : 2024 INSC 732 S. Vijikumari v. Mowneshwarachari C (Criminal Appeal No. 3989 of 2024) 10 September 2024 [B.V. Nagarathna* and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Respondent sought refund of the entire maintenance amount which was paid to the appellant (wife of respondent). Headnotes† Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – s.25 – Respondent filed an application u/s. 25 of the Act and sought setting aside of order dated 23.02.2015 by which his appellant-wife was granted Rs.12,000/- per month as maintenance and Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation – Respondent also sought return of the maintenance amount paid on the ground of fraud: Held: The Magistrate while exercising his discretion under Section 25(2) of the Act has to be satisfied that a change in the circumstances has occurred, requiring to pass an order of alteration, modification or revocation – The Magistrate has to adjudge the change in the circumstances based on the material put forth by the parties in a case and having regard to the circumstances of the said case – In the instant case, the order dated 23.02.2015 has attained finality – Therefore, there cannot be a setting aside of the order dated 23.02.2015 for the period prior to such an application for revocation being made – The second prayer (for refund of the entire amount of maintenance) was not at all maintainable inasmuch as that any alteration, modification or revocation of an order passed under Section 12 of the Act owing to a change in circumstances could only be for a period ex post facto, i.e., post the period of an order being made in a petition under Section 12 of the Act and not to a period prior thereto – Thus, such an application for alteration, modification or revocation filed under sub-section (2) of Section 25 of the Act cannot relate to any * Author 46 [2024] 10 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports period prior to the order being passed, inter alia, under Section 12 of the Act – Therefore, the prayers sought by the respondent were not maintainable under sub-section (2) of section 25 of the Act. [Paras 13, 17, 18] Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Applicability of: Held: The Act is a piece of Civil Code which is applicable to every woman in India irrespective of her religious affiliation and/or social background for a more effective protection of her rights guaranteed under the Constitution and in order to protect women victims of domestic violence occurring in a domestic relationship. [Para 11] Case Law Cited Alexander Sambath Abner vs. Miron Lede, 2009 SCC OnLine Mad 2851 – referred to. List of Acts Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. List of Keywords Women victims; Domestic Violence; Section 25 of Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; Section 12 of Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; Alteration; Modification; Revocation; Change in circumstance; Refund of amount of maintenance. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 3989 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 06.04.2023 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in CRLRP No.674 of 2022 Appearances for Parties Ms. Sruti Chaganti, Shekhar Badiger, N. Sai Vinod, Advs. for the Appellant. Ms. Harsha Tripathi, Balaji Srinivasan, Advs. for the Respondent. [2024] 10 S.C.R. 47 S. Vijikumari v. Mowneshwarachari C Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Nagarathna, J. Leave granted. 2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 06.04.2023 passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.674/2022 by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, the appellant who is the wife of the respondent has preferred this appeal. 3. Briefly stated, the facts are that the appellant-wife had filed a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The said petition, i.e., Criminal Miscellaneous No.6/2014 was allowed by the learned Magistrate by order dated 23.02.2015, granting Rs.12,000/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand only) per month as maintenance and Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) towards compensation. At this stage itself, it may be mentioned that the respondent-husband did not let in any evidence in the said proceeding. Being aggrieved by the order of the l
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.