Delhi court dismisses woman's maintenance appeal amid false rape allegation, property dispute

New Delhi [India], March 8 (ANI): Observing that serious allegations such as forcible occupation of property, forgery of documents and filing of criminal complaints appeared from the record, the Karkardooma court of Delhi dismissed an appeal filed by a complainant woman seeking interim maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.
The order was passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge (North-East), Karkardooma Courts, Sanjay Sharma, who upheld the trial court's decision rejecting the woman's application for interim maintenance. The court found no illegality in the earlier order and declined to interfere with it.
The appeal had been filed by the complainant woman after a Mahila Court in North-East Delhi dismissed her plea for interim maintenance in a domestic violence complaint. She had sought monetary relief from her husband, alleging domestic violence and harassment.
While dismissing the appeal, the court noted the sequence of criminal cases filed between the parties and the absence of documentary material to substantiate the allegations made by the complainant before the trial court.
The court observed, "It is to be appreciated that the incident which is the subject matter of the FIR lodged by the respondents against the complainant and her family members for the offence under Section 452/323 IPC of their having forcibly occupied the house of the respondent, is dated July 20, 2023.
The said FIR was registered on July 22, 2023. Similarly, the second FIR under Section 420/406 IPC was registered on November 4, 2023.
The appellant made the first complaint to the CAW Cell on July 14, 2023, and her FIR was registered only on February 13, 2024. The said FIR is not a complaint simplicitor for harassment due to dowry demands, but in that FIR, she has implicated 13 members of the family of the respondents with allegations not only of dowry demand, but for rape and unnatural intercourse. These allegations in itself amount to cruelty against the respondent."
The court also noted that the marriage between the parties lasted for around one year and four months and that the complainant had not produced documentary evidence before the trial court to support the allegations made in her complaint, except for a CAW Cell complaint that was later converted into an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, 376 and 377 of the IPC.
Appearing for the respondent husband, Advocate Ravi Drall argued that the complainant did not qualify as an "aggrieved person" under the Domestic Violence Act. He contended that she, along with her family members, had allegedly thrown the respondent's mother out of her own house and forcibly occupied the property.
The counsel further argued that forged documents relating to the residential flat were prepared and that criminal complaints, including allegations of rape against the husband and several family members, were subsequently filed. It was also argued that the respondent and his mother are currently residing in rented accommodation, while the complainant continues to occupy the disputed property and is working as a trainer at a gym.
After hearing the parties and examining the record, the sessions court held that the trial court had committed no illegality in rejecting the interim maintenance application. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed after multiple hearings. However, the court clarified that the complainant remains free to lead evidence before the trial court to prove her allegations and may seek interim maintenance again if circumstances so warrant. (ANI)