Thane: The Thane sessions court has rejected the application filed by a 77-year-old UK resident opposing a domestic violence case filed by his 66-year-old wife, a Thane resident.
About The Case
The wife presented records of domestic violence that she allegedly endured during their relationship. The court observed that the evidence presented was extensive, spanning nearly 30 years, and required detailed verification. Therefore, the case could not be dismissed outright.
The Thane resident married the UK citizen in September 1989 and later moved to the UK on a tourist visa, according to the woman’s application. However, she allegedly discovered that he was a divorcee and was caring for two daughters from his previous marriage.
Advocate Aarti Kalekar, representing the woman, stated, “The man treated her like a domestic help. He never registered the marriage, but we have evidence showing that he filed the registration form. Their relationship was stable until 2018 when the wife asked for maintenance. He then claimed he never married her and alleged she forcibly entered his house. We produced the wedding photo album, which shows the rituals performed. Based on this, we filed a domestic violence case against him in 2019.”
Man Opposes The Claim
The man, however, opposed the claim, asserting that he did not know the woman. The court ruled, “The Magistrate, while determining the points, can examine whether there is any domestic violence and/or a domestic relationship, and based on this, decide whether the party is entitled to any relief claimed. There is no provision to raise the issue of maintainability before the Magistrate, particularly in a proceeding that is to be tried summarily. As per the wife’s contention, she has substantial evidence to prove the marriage, and she should be given a fair opportunity. Therefore, the application filed by the estranged husband seeking dismissal of the proceeding on the grounds of non-performance of marriage or lack of a live-in relationship is wholly misconceived and misdirected. The application is devoid of merit, and the Magistrate was right to reject it.”
