ATUL AMRUT RAYBOLE Vs. SHUBHANGI ATUL RAYBOLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the Petitioners.

(2.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order dtd. 12/5/2021 in Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2018, whereby the Petitioner-Husband has been directed to pay maintenance @ Rs.5,000.00 p.a. to his wife from the date of application till its realization under Sec. 12r/w. 20 (1) (c) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('the said Act' for short).Factual Matrix: The Petitioner instituted the Hindu Marriage Petition on 11/9/2013 seeking dissolution of his marriage with Respondent No.1. Pending Hindu Marriage Petition, Respondent No.2 filed an application under Sec. 12 under the said Act for monitory reliefs. The Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class rejected the application. Thereafter she filed criminal appeal under Sec. 29 of the said Act. In appeal, the Petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance @ Rs.5,000.00 p.m. and Rs.1,000.00 p.m. towards the rent payable for her separate residence from the date of application till its realization. Aggrieved by the order dtd. 12/5/2021, this petition is preferred. Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Respondent was not entitled to claim the maintenance because parties were not in a 'domestic relationship' as defined under the said Act of 2005.

(3.) I do not agree with the submissions of Mr. Patil. Sec. 2(f) of the Act of 2005 defines the 'domestic relationship' which reads as under:-