An appeal under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005

INTRODUCTION:

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is a legislation that was enacted with the purpose of providing protection to women from violence and abuse in domestic relationships. One of the key features of this Act is the provision for an appeal against orders passed by the Magistrates under the Act. Section 29 of the Act lays down the procedure for filing an appeal against such orders. In this article, we will discuss the scope and application of Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act.

WHO CAN FILE AN APPEAL?

Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act provides that an appeal can be filed by either the aggrieved person or the respondent, within thirty days from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate is served on them, whichever is later. This means that both parties to the case have the right to challenge the order passed by the Magistrate.

WHERE WILL THE APPEAL LIE?

The appeal under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act lies before the Court of Session. This court has the jurisdiction to hear appeals against orders passed by the Magistrates under the Act. It is important to note that the appeal must be filed within thirty days from the date of service of the order.

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION:

The question of maintainability of a revision petition under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) in cases where an appeal lies under the Domestic Violence Act was discussed in the case of Smt. Maya Devi v. State Of N.C.T Of Delhi And Another. The court held that when a specific remedy by way of appeal has been provided under the Act, a revision petition under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Furthermore, in the case of Neha Chaturvedi v. State & Anr., the court emphasized the importance of filing an appeal under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act within the stipulated time period of thirty days. In Surendra Pal Singh v. Smt Rekha Singh, the court held that an appeal can be filed against interim orders passed by the Magistrate under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act. This ruling ensures that parties do not have to wait till the final order to challenge any interim orders that may be prejudicial to their interests. In Mr Mohd Irfan Ahamed v. Mrs Seema S A, the court went a step further and held that any order passed by the Magistrate under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act is appealable before the Court of Sessions.

THE QUESTION OF DEPOSITING MAINTENANCE AMOUNT BEFORE HEARING OF APPEAL:

In the case of Brijesh Kumar Gupta v. Shikha Gupta & Anr., the court addressed the issue of whether the entire maintenance amount as granted by the trial court should be deposited before hearing the statutory appeal under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act. The court held that there cannot be an absolute rider for the deposit of the entire maintenance amount and directed the Appellate Court to hear the appeal on merits without such a pre-condition. This decision was followed in the case of Rangesh Srinivasan v. Madhulika Bawa, where the court once again reiterated that the appellate court should hear the appeal without imposing any pre-condition of depositing the entire arrears of maintenance.

CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act provides an important remedy for parties to challenge orders passed by the Magistrates under the Act. It is important for parties to be aware of their rights and the time limit for filing an appeal. The courts have also clarified that an appeal can be filed against interim orders and that there is no requirement for depositing the entire maintenance amount before the hearing of the appeal. This provision plays a crucial role in ensuring that justice is served to parties involved in domestic violence cases and that their grievances are heard and addressed.