MUMBAI COURT HIKES DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COMPENSATION FROM Rs.5 LAKH TO Rs.1 CRORE, CITING HUSBAND’S WEALTH:

Observing that the husband and his family are 'crorepatis', a Mumbai sessions court recently increased the compensation awarded to a woman who endured 20 years of abuse, humiliation, and domestic violence, from Rs.5 lakh to Rs.1 crore. Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Ansari remarked that the Rs.5 lakh compensation earlier granted by the Magistrate Court was 'meagre'.

"It is clear that the husband has not been able to prove the fact of he being in dire straits, financially. On the other hand, the material on the record reflects that he and his family are what in common parlance is called 'crorepatis.' The facts of the matter as proved on the record will show that after suffering domestic violence in the nature of beatings, severe assaults, taunts and even financial deprivation in a marriage of almost 20 years, the complainant was forced to approach the court for seeking maintenance, etc. as the last resort. The physical and mental torture as also the sustained emotional distress felt by the complainant while living with the husband can therefore, scarcely be imagined," Judge Ansari said in the order passed on May 5.

The judge noted that given the husband's considerable wealth, the Rs.5 lakh compensation awarded by the Metropolitan Magistrate was far too meagre. He emphasized that a significant increase was necessary to truly compensate the wife for the 20 years of suffering she endured, including torture, humiliation, economic abuse, and constant taunts at the hands of her husband.

"The fact that the complainant has to now also suffer being estranged from her two sons, as the husband appears to have influenced them against their mother, is also something which cannot be ignored. The husband though has tried his level best to show that he is not in a good financial situation, has not been successful in proving the said contention. On the other hand, he being in a position to purchase properties worth Rs.1 crore in 2012, and presently running an elevator company, will surely be rolling in money. Hence, balancing the scale, I am of the view that the compensation as granted to the wife needs to be enhanced to Rs.1 crore," the judge ordered.

The court was hearing appeals filed by both the husband and his parents, as well as the wife, challenging a Metropolitan Magistrate’s order from February 18, 2020. While the wife sought higher compensation and an increase in the Rs.1 lakh monthly maintenance awarded, the husband contested both amounts.

In his 70-page order, Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Ansari noted the couple had been married since December 1997 and lived together until November 2016, when the wife filed a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act. She accused her husband of over 20 years of abuse—physical, mental, emotional, and economic.

The wife highlighted her husband’s and in-laws' substantial wealth, including multiple properties and businesses. She alleged being made a 'namesake' director in one company, which was later sold without her knowledge. Despite their wealth, she claimed she was often berated over expenses and threatened for spending on household needs.

She further alleged that her in-laws and husband physically assaulted her, pressured her for a male child, and blamed her for infertility. After conceiving triplets and suffering a miscarriage due to alleged stress from her in-laws, she later had two sons and a daughter. She claimed the daughter was not accepted by the family, leaving her solely responsible for the child's upbringing. The husband denied all allegations and argued that the wife failed to provide specific dates for the alleged assaults.

Rejecting the husband's arguments, Judge Ansari held, "No wife can be expected to remember the exact dates and exact trivial reasons for her husband assaulting her over a long period of time. No other witnesses can also have been expected to be examined by the complainant on the said aspect, as the incidents of assault had almost always occurred within the four walls of the house. In such circumstances, the mere fact of the complainant not being able to recall the reason for the trivial fights between her and her husband, as also the specific dates on which she had been physically assaulted cannot at all be said to be grounds sufficient to challenge her testimony regarding the same."

The court found the wife's testimony credible and consistent, establishing domestic violence by the husband, though not by his parents. It concluded that she was also subjected to economic abuse.

Addressing the husband’s claim that the wife, a Textile Engineer, could earn for herself, Judge Ansari clarified that earning potential does not negate the right to maintenance if the wife has faced domestic violence. He also dismissed the argument that the minor daughter could support herself.

Highlighting the husband's substantial wealth evidenced by property purchases worth over Rs.1 crore—the court stated that both the wife and daughter are entitled to maintain the same standard of living. Accordingly, the judge raised the compensation from Rs.5 lakh to Rs.1 crore and increased monthly maintenance from Rs.1 lakh to Rs.1.5 lakh