Spending time and money for mother is not domestic violence: Mumbai court

The District Court of Mumbai has rejected a plea filed by a 43-year-old woman seeking action against her husband and his relatives under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

New Delhi: District Court of Mumbai on Wednesday in a statement mentioned that husband’s provision of time and financial support to his mother does not constitute to domestic violence. The court’s decision came ahead of rejecting a plea filed by a 43-year old woman seeking action against her husband and his relatives under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

Additional sessions judge Ashishb Ayachit stated that,”the grievance that the husband is giving time and money to his mother cannot be considered as domestic violence.”

Complaint Filed By The Woman

In her complaint, the woman stated that her husband traveled for work from September 1993 to December 2004 and that in addition to paying for his mother’s eye surgery, he used to send her an annual payment of Rs 10,000.

In response, the husband accused her of financial impropriety and mentioned that he had taken unauthorized money from his NRE (non-resident external) account in order to buy a house. The woman was given Rs 3,000 per month in interim maintenance during court proceedings, but her plea was rejected by the magistrate court after the evidence was examined.

Allegations Made On Her Husband

Earlier rejected in 2015 by a magistrate’s court, the woman serving as an assistant at the ‘Mantralaya’ (state secretariat), asserted that due to her husband’s frequent financial assistance and time spent with his mother, creates conflicts in her marriage.

She also said that tensions in the family worsened because she was unaware of her mother-in-law’s mental-health issues before they were married.The woman had applied for maintenance and compensation for her adult daughter in addition to seeking relief under the DV Act, which disqualified her from making maintenance claims on her behalf.

Response From The Court

The court rejected the wife’s appeal, dismissing her claims as “vague” and lacking “confidence of truthfulness” and emphasizing that the husband’s support of his mother and the alleged abuse by in-laws did not qualify as domestic violence.

The court reviewed facts of the case and observed that the couple, who were married in 1993, had ended their union in 2014 due to the woman’s cruelty. The court also reviewed evidence of the husband’s difficulties, including attempts at suicide while they were married.

It further stated that the husband had made two or three attempts at suicide during the marriage, according to the evidence and other pertinent pleadings.

“After carefully examining all of the evidence provided by both the applicant and respondent number 1 (the applicant’s husband), I believe that the applicant has woefully failed to establish that she was the victim of domestic abuse,” the judge declared.

After reviewing the case’s facts, the court noted that the couple—who had been married since 1993—had separated in 2014 as a result of the woman’s abuse. The husband’s struggles, including attempts at suicide during their marriage, were also presented to the court. It went on to say that, in light of the evidence and other relevant pleadings, the husband had attempted suicide two or three times during their marriage.

After carefully reviewing the case file, the court determined that the woman’s allegations lacked substantiation. It stressed that there was insufficient proof to back up the woman’s claims of domestic abuse and mentioned that the husband had started the divorce process in response to the woman’s alleged cruelties.

The judge stated,”Careful reading of the entire evidence of the applicant and respondent number 1 (husband), I am of the opinion that the applicant has miserably failed to prove that she was subjected to domestic violence.”

(With inputs from agencies)