A sessions court upheld an order forcing a "gay" man to pay maintenance to his estranged wife on December 10, noting that the term "aggrieved person" under the Domestic Violence Act would not only encompass a woman who experiences physical abuse but also sexual, verbal, and emotional assault. 

Further Sessions The husband's appeal against a magistrate court ruling awarding the wife Rs. 15,000 in maintenance was denied by Judge Dr. AA Joglekar.

"Considering the tenor of Section 3 of the Domestic Violence Act it can be clearly inferred that, the term domestic violence in corporates for a wider scope and it is not at all limited for mere physical   injuries   or   abuse,   but   the   same   can   also   be   stretched pertaining to sexual, verbal, emotional and economical abuse." 

The court upheld the trial court's finding that any violation of the section by the respondent (spouse) would logically fall under the category of domestic violence. 

In December 2012, the couple were hitched. The wife's case was that the husband had been sexting other guys while they had been married for more than six months. He developed a fake Facebook account that "reflects [his] compromising situation with other men" and would often arrive home from work late. Her efforts to complete their marriage were fruitless.

On the other hand, the guy asserted that his wife had neither evidence of his alleged activities nor had he denied having sex with her. Actually, she was the one who used her exams as the reason why she wouldn't continue having sex with him. His wife had always had suspicions. 

Notably, he claimed that her claims of domestic violence were ambiguous because she had filed to establish the identity of the alleged perpetrator. "Trial Court is in transgression to the very concept of the termed aggrieved person, more especially when the applicant failed to have stated as to who caused domestic violence to her," he argued through a lawyer.

The court observed after reading the wife's testimonial evidence that she had viewed screenshots and photos of her husband in his underwear. "It is evident that, the said contents accessed and retrieved by her from the respondent No.1's mobile phone has naturally caused such trauma, distress and emotional abuse to the applicant," the court said.

Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 492 OF 2021.
IN C.C.NO. 1/DV/2018