SMT. SANTOSH Vs. SIDDHARTH B.S.MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been presented by the appellant-wife against her being aggrieved by the decree of divorce granted on August 31, 2019 by the First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal, in RCS HM No.166/2015.

(2.) The relevant facts are that the appellant and the respondent married on 31/1/2009 at Alwar as per the customs prevalent in their society. On 12/4/2011, they blessed with a son. Their marriage could not work. As per averments of the wife, behaviour of the respondenthusband towards her was very cruel, rude, disrespectful and disgraceful. Perturbed and distressed by his behaviour, she along with her minor son left his house situated in Mumbai on 13/8/2013 and came to her father's place in Bhopal. The matrimonial litigations then flared up between both of them. On 6/2/2014, as per the customs prevailing in their society, the respondent/husband presented an application for divorce before the Pachas (arbitrators) of the society. He made several allegations against her, but the 'Panch' of the society refused to give any order in his favour. He then filed a petition seeking divorce at Jaipur; which was subsequently transferred to Bhopal by the Supreme Court. The appellant/wife also filed a complaint under Sec. 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the respondent/husband, and his family members in the Mahila Police Station, Bhopal, but the police did not take any action on it. Aggrieved by this, she filed a complaint before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhopal under Sec. 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) The appellant also filed a domestic violence petition against the respondent and his family members. She also filed a petition under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights, which was subsequently withdrawn. The respondent filed a petition for declaring him guardian of their son and seeking his custody. On 28/2/2015, after hearing of this petition, the respondent got agitated and started abusing her. He along with his two associates assaulted her and caused severe injuries. He also threatened her to kill. The appellant immediately filed an FIR No.143/2015 under Ss. 294, 323, 506, 34 of the IPC complaining about the aforesaid incident and the injury caused to her. The respondent also lodged cross FIR bearing number 144/2015 against the appellant under Sec. 363 of the IPC alleging that she had kidnapped her own son. The appellant preferred a petition being CRR No. 3794/2017 against this FIR before the High Court; which was allowed vide order dtd. 16/5/2018 holding that the appellant is a natural guardian and mother of the child, therefore, the charge of kidnapping cannot be framed against her. On challenge by the respondent, the Supreme Court upheld the order of the High Court vide order dtd. 3/12/2018.