T. ARMSTRONG CHANGSAN Vs. NEIKOL CHANGSAN
LAWS(GAU)-2018-3-35
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on March 23,2018

T. Armstrong Changsan Appellant
VERSUS
Neikol Changsan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

MIR ALFAZ ALI - (1.) This criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC is filed praying for quashing the proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act for short) in Misc. Case No. 50M/2014 pending in the Court of the learned Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM), No. 1, Kamrup, seeking relief under Section 18, 19 and 20 of the Act.
(2.) The brief facts leading to the present petition are that the respondent No. 2 and petitioner were married in the month of May, 1994 as per Karbi rites and customs. They could not pull on well together, consequently, the marital boat moved into rough weather and ultimately the relationship broke down resulting in separation in the year 2010. There was a decree of divorce passed on 23.2.2011 by the Court of Dima Hasao Autonomous Council Court in T.S. No. 2/2011. The said decree of divorce was challenged by the respondent No. 2 in appeal. However, later on, the appeal was withdrawn and the decree of divorce attained finality.
(3.) The petitioner was residing at Pretoria in South Africa in connection with his employment, where he received an e-mail, whereby the petitioner was directed to appear before the SDJM, Kamrup (M) in connection with Misc. Case No. 50M/2014, instituted by the respondent No. 2. It was alleged in the complaint lodged by the respondent No. 2, that in the month of February, 2000, the petitioner physically assaulted the respondent. In the month of June, 2000, there was a quarrel and the petitioner hit the respondent, for which she had to come back to India for treatment and rest. She was again assaulted by the petitioner in the month of August, 2001. It was further stated that there was quarrel between the husband and wife in the month of December, 2007, at night and in course of such quarrel, the petitioner dragged the respondent by holding her hair and she was also dealt with kicks and blows in presence of her mother and elder sister. In the month of September, 2008, there was argument between them and petitioner assaulted her. In the month of September, 2010, the petitioner left for Delhi in connection with his official work and did not return home to live together with the respondent No. 2, where they were living. It was further stated that the respondent was facing financial hardship and therefore filed the application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act. Learned Magistrate passed an ex-parte order granting interim maintenance in favour of the respondent @ Rs. 20,000/- and another Rs. 5,000/- for educational expenses of the child per month.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.