MD. RAJAB ALI Vs. MANJULA KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application is filed against the Judgment and Order dated 16.06.2012, passed by the learned Court of Additional Session Judge (F.T.C.), Sankardev Nagar, Hojai in Criminal Appeal No. 14(N)/2011, rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioners and affirming the Judgment and Order dated 03.02.2011, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sankardev Nagar, Hojai in Misc Case No. 07/2009, arising out of a petition under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, for short, D.V. Act, filed by the opposite party.

(2.) The present petition is filed by 3 petitioners, who are, father-in-law and brothers-in-law of the opposite party, respectively. The case of the opposite party, in a nut-shell, as set out in the application under section 12 of D.V. Act, inter-alia, is that the opposite party was married to Md. Nurul Islam on 27.04.2008 by execution of a registered Kabinnama fixing Mahr of Rs.39,000/- and at the time of marriage, valuable articles including gold ornaments in the form of stridhan was given to the opposite party, which, she handed over to the respondents to the said application numbering 6, which included the present petitioners, her husband Md. Nurul Islam, her mother-in-law and wife of present petitioner No. 2 herein. The said respondents, after few days of marriage, started torture upon the opposite party and pressurized her to bring cash amount of Rs.50,000/-. As she and her family were unable to fulfill the demand, she was, on 30.11.2008, driven out from her matrimonial house. It was also stated that the opposite party was, at the time of marriage, studying in TDC 1st year and she had resumed her education. It is further stated that no maintenance whatsoever was granted to her and that her husband has sources of earning from Agar business, agricultural etc. and that he earns about Rs. 30,000/- to Rs. 40,000/- per month. The Respondents are owners of land and residential house and she had resided

(3.) Except the husband, all other respondents in the said application under section 12 of the D.V. Act, submitted written statement stating that husband of the applicant had left the house without their knowledge and his whereabouts is not known. It was pleaded that the couple was living separately in a separate establishment and they generally denied the allegations made in the application.