Krishna Bhatacharjee Vs. Sarathi Choudhury and Anr.
|
Head Note
The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 2 , Section 3 , Section 12 , The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 468
Domestic Violence - Continuing Offence - Economic abuse - Aggrieved party - Stridhan - Claim for - Continuing offence - Limitation - As long as the status of the aggrieved person remains and stridhan remains in the custody of the husband, the wife can always put forth her claim under Section 12 of the 2005 Act as the status between the parties is not severed because of the decree of dissolution of marriage - Concept of "continuing offence" gets attracted from the date of deprivation of stridhan, for neither the husband nor any other family members can have any right over the stridhan and they remain the custodians - Application was not barred by limitation - Courts below as well as the High Court had fallen into a grave error by dismissing the application being barred by limitation.
The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 2 , Section 3 , Section 12
Section 2(a), 2(f) , 2(g), 3(iv), 12 - Domestic Violence - Aggrieved Party - Judicial separation - Stridhan - Claim for - Held that there is a distinction between a decree for divorce and decree of judicial separation - In the former, there is a severance of status and the parties do not remain as husband and wife, whereas in the later, the relationship between husband and wife continues and the legal relationship continues as it has not been snapped - Thus understood, the finding recorded by the courts below which have been concurred by the High Court that the parties having been judicial separated, the appellant wife has ceased to be an "aggrieved person" is wholly unsustainable.
Topic(s)-Domestic Violence - Aggrieved Party - Judicial Separated wife is aggrieved party