New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with an order granting Rs 26,000 per month as interim maintenance to a woman under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDV Act), holding that unproven allegations of adultery cannot be a ground to deny such relief at the interim stage.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by the husband, who had challenged concurrent orders of a magistrate and a sessions court directing him to pay interim maintenance to his estranged wife.
Rejecting the husband’s contention that the wife was allegedly “living in adultery” and therefore not entitled to maintenance, Justice Sharma held that such disputed questions of fact could be decided only after evidence is led at trial.
“At the stage of passing interim orders, the court is required to take only a prima facie view based on the material placed on record,” the Delhi High Court said, adding that “interim maintenance under the PWDV Act cannot be denied merely on the basis of unproven allegations of an illicit relationship”.
The order took note of the husband’s reliance on photographs allegedly showing the wife in a compromising position with another man, but said their genuineness and veracity could only be examined during trial.
“The said photographs are yet to be proved in accordance with law during the course of trial, after evidence is led by the parties,” Justice Sharma said.
Drawing a distinction between proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC and the PWDV Act, the Delhi High Court observed that while Section 125(4) expressly bars maintenance to a wife living in adultery, “there is no express statutory bar under the PWDV Act disentitling a woman from seeking reliefs merely on the allegation that she is living in adultery”.
“Any material or evidence relating to the conduct of the wife, including allegations of adultery, would undoubtedly be a relevant factor; however, the same would essentially be a matter requiring adjudication after evidence is led,” the judgment said.
On the issue of whether the wife qualified as an “aggrieved person” under the PWDV Act, the Delhi High Court, in its order, recorded the existence of an undisputed domestic relationship and noted that the wife had made detailed allegations of physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, and economic abuse during the subsistence of the marriage.
Prima facie, Justice Sharma said, the allegations, including claims of repeated humiliation, denial of financial support, abusive and derogatory language, and character assassination, fell within the broad contours of domestic violence as defined under the PWDV Act.
The domestic incident report filed by the Protection Officer also lent prima facie support to the wife’s case, the order added.
However, while dismissing the revision petition, the Delhi High Court directed the trial court to make all endeavours to decide the domestic violence petition expeditiously, preferably within one year. It also clarified that if, upon final adjudication, the trial court concludes that the wife is not entitled to maintenance on account of living in adultery, she would be liable to return the entire interim maintenance amount received by her, along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum.
The Delhi HC further directed the wife to file an affidavit before the trial court undertaking to return the interim maintenance amount with interest, if she is ultimately found disentitled to such relief.
(IANS)
