Mumbai: In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has held that a local Magistrate court has sufficient powers and jurisdiction to conduct a trial in a domestic violence complaint, even if the actual violence has taken place in the United States.
A bench of Justice Sambhaji Shinde has accordingly dismissed a plea filed by a US-based IT professional, who challenged a Magistrate’s order directing him to pay maintenance to his wife and son.
The man claimed that the Magistrate did not have any jurisdiction to entertain his now estranged wife’s plea as the alleged domestic violence has taken place in US and not in Mumbai.
While trashing this argument of the husband, Justice Shinde said, “The courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would (depending on the factual situation) also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging domestic violence.”
“There is no substance in the contention of the husband that the Magistrate’s court at Mumbai has no jurisdiction to entertain his wife’s complaint,” Justice Shinde ruled.
The man and the woman had married in 2008 at Lucknow as per the Muslim rites. The couple subsequently migrated to US and settled there and was blessed with a baby boy in 2013.
Soon there were differences and the wife moved to Columbus, Indiana, and later on travelled to India and started living with her brother in Mumbai.
The wife accused her husband of domestic violence and physical and mental harassment.
However, while she continued to live in Mumbai, the husband filed a plea in the Superior Court at California seeking divorce and also sought permanent custody of the child.
The SC of California granted a decree in the favour of the husband and also the custody of the child. The court, there, also issued arrest warrants against the wife, for having fled with the child.
Having learnt of the developments in California, the wife moved a plea before the Magistrate’s court in Mulund and sought reliefs under the Domestic Violence Act.
One of the reliefs was interim maintenance. The Magistrate, having considered the facts, allowed her plea and ordered the husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs 30,000 and Rs 15,000 for the wife and the child, respectively.
Aggrieved by this order, the husband challenged it before a Sessions court, which upheld the Magistrate’s order. He finally moved Justice Shinde’s bench, which refused to entertain his plea and ordered him to continue paying the interim maintenance and to face the trial till it concludes.
