Latest news with #MetropolitanMagistrateCourt
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
3 days ago
- Business Standard
Mumbai court raises domestic violence compensation from ₹5 lakh to ₹1 crore
A sessions court in Mumbai has significantly increased the compensation awarded to a woman who suffered domestic violence for 20 years — raising it from ₹5 lakh to ₹1 crore, according to a report by legal news portal Live Law. The court noted that the woman's husband and his family are 'crorepatis', meaning extremely wealthy, and that the original compensation amount was too low. In an order passed on May 5, Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Ansari stated that the ₹5 lakh compensation set by the Magistrate Court was 'meagre". He observed, '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.' The judge further noted that the husband's wealth was a crucial factor in determining appropriate compensation. He said, '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 ₹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 ₹1 crore.' Case background The case involved appeals from both sides: the husband and his parents, and the wife. They were contesting an earlier Metropolitan Magistrate Court order issued on February 18, 2020. The wife had sought an increase in both compensation and her ₹1 lakh monthly maintenance, while the husband challenged both amounts. In a 70-page order, Judge Ansari recounted that the couple married on December 12, 1997, and lived together until November 2016. The wife filed a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act that same month, accusing her husband of humiliation, abuse, assault, physical, mental and economic cruelty during more than two decades of marriage. Wife's testimony against wealthy husband The wife explained how her husband and in-laws operated several businesses, one of which listed her as a 'namesake' director — she was made to sign documents but had no real role. That company was later sold without her knowledge. She also said the couple owned several properties, including flats across Maharashtra and villas in Lonavla. According to her, the husband often berated her about spending and even threatened violence if she used extra money for household needs — claims the husband denied. She further alleged that her husband and in-laws physically assaulted her and never wanted a girl child. Initially, she was taunted for not conceiving; when she became pregnant with triplets, a miscarriage followed due to 'stress' from her in-laws and husband. Even after giving birth to two sons, she faced continued abuse, and her daughter was not accepted by the family — leading her to support her daughter alone. Court rejects husband's defence The husband disputed these accusations, including the physical abuse, arguing that his wife failed to provide exact dates of assault. Rejecting his 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 'unshaken' regarding most allegations. However, it ruled that she proved domestic violence only by her husband — not her in-laws. The court also determined that the husband committed 'economic abuse.' Responding to the husband's claim that his wife, a textile engineer, was capable of earning an income, Judge Ansari said: 'Even otherwise, having the capacity to earn by itself, cannot result in the rejection of any claim of maintenance by a complainant who is subjected to domestic violence at the hands of her husband. The question of the complainant's minor daughter being in a position to maintain herself, also does not arise. I am therefore of the clear view that the complainant and her minor daughter are entitled to claim maintenance from the husband. The fact that the husband and his parents had the capacity to spend more than ₹1 crore for purchasing land as also a flat in Kharghar in the year 2012 is a clear reflection of their sound financial status as also the fact of they belonging to the class commonly known as 'crorepatis.' It is therefore, not difficult to imagine their standard of living at all times. This being so and the complainant having been subjected to domestic violence at the hands of the husband, she as also her daughter will be entitled to enjoy the same standard of living as that of the respondents.' With these observations, Judge Ansari enhanced the compensation from ₹5 lakh to ₹1 crore and increased monthly maintenance from ₹1 lakh to ₹1.5 lakh — for both the wife and the couple's minor daughter.
Express Tribune
16-04-2025
- Express Tribune
Police confirm limited fingerprint link in Saif Ali Khan stabbing probe
Listen to article A significant development has emerged in the investigation into the stabbing of actor Saif Ali Khan, with Mumbai Police confirming that 19 of the 20 fingerprint samples collected from the actor's Bandra residence do not match those of the accused, Shariful Islam. According to the chargesheet, filed last week in the Metropolitan Magistrate Court, only one fingerprint—found on the eighth floor of the building—matched the accused. The remaining prints, including those on the bathroom door, sliding bedroom door and a cupboard, did not correspond with Shariful Islam's, raising questions over the physical evidence linking him directly to the scene. Police, however, remain confident in their case. According to Indian meda fingerprint matches alone are not considered conclusive, given that household items are routinely touched by many people. Officers noted that the likelihood of obtaining usable and unique prints from such surfaces is minimal, citing odds of just one in a thousand. The chargesheet, spanning over 1,000 pages, outlines a broader set of evidence. This includes knife fragments recovered from Khan's body and the crime scene, which forensic analysis confirms are part of the same weapon seized from the accused. 'The knife pieces found at the scene, from Saif Ali Khan's body, and from the accused are from the same knife,' police said while opposing Islam's bail. The case has also unearthed evidence of unauthorised financial activity. Investigators claim Islam, believed to be a Bangladeshi national, transferred money out of India via a relative, using informal channels to reach his brother-in-law, Abdulla Alim, through a bank account in Bangalore. Saif Ali Khan was attacked on 16 January during a suspected robbery at his residence. The assailant reportedly gained access to the flat and injured one of Khan's staff before the actor intervened and sustained multiple stab wounds, including damage to his thoracic spine. He was hospitalised at Lilavati Hospital and discharged after five days. While Shariful Islam has maintained that the charges are fabricated, police insist their case is backed by forensic and technological findings, including facial recognition, witness identification, and digital evidence. The absence of matching fingerprints, they argue, does not undermine the weight of other corroborating material. Earlier, Soha Ali Khan publicly addressed the online backlash surrounding her brother Saif Ali Khan's swift recovery In a recent media interaction, sheexpressed her frustration, saying such commentary lacks empathy. She stated that "But yes, I do get angry when people comment without having any information. They don't have any emotions attached, so where do these passionate opinions come from?' She further added that 'When it doesn't affect their personal lives, why do they get so interested? That is beyond my understanding.
