ABHIRAM GOGOI Vs. RASHMI REKHA GOGOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 30.9.2009, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tinsukia, in C.R. Case No. 154C/2007, directing the Petitioner herein to pay, as maintenance, Rs. 4,000, per month, to the Respondent herein and Rs. 1,000, per month, to the Respondent's minor child, w.e.f. the date of filing of the petition by the Respondent herein, under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('the Domestic Violence Act'), against her husband (i.e., the Petitioner herein). In effect, thus, the present revision petition puts to challenge maintenance order made under Section 18 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('the said Act') on the ground that the order has been made on the basis of an application made by an aggrieved person without obtaining any domestic incident report from the Protection Officer, though no maintenance order, it is contended, on behalf of the Petitioner, can be made, under Section 18 of the said Act, without obtaining the domestic incident report from a Protection Officer.

(2.) The moot question, therefore, which this revision raises is: Whether it is mandatory for a Magistrate to obtain a domestic incident report before the Magistrate passes an order under Section 18, (which relates to maintenance orders), Section 19, (which relates to residence orders), Section 20, (which relates to monetary reliefs) and/or Section 21, (which relates to custody orders) of the said Act?

(3.) My quest for an answer to the above question brings me, first, to the definition of 'aggrieved person' because without correctly understanding the meaning of the expression 'aggrieved person', it may not be possible to answer correctly the question posed in this application.