Aji Mathew vs P.C.Saiju — 100222/2021
Case under Cr. P.c. \ Section S 374(3). Status: FOR HEARING. Next hearing: 12th May 2026.
Crl.A - CRIMINAL APPEAL
CNR: KLER480001142021
Next Hearing
12th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
86/2021
Filing Date
21-10-2021
Registration No
100222/2021
Registration Date
09-11-2021
Court
Addl. District Court, Muvattupuzha/Rent Control Appellate Authority
Judge
1-Addl. District and Sessions Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Aji Mathew
Adv. Adv.Riji.P.
Respondent(s)
P.C.Saiju
The State Rep. by Public Prosecutor
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Addl. District and Sessions Judge
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | FOR HEARING | |
| 09-03-2026 | FOR HEARING | |
| 24-02-2026 | FOR HEARING | |
| 06-02-2026 | FOR HEARING | |
| 27-01-2026 | FOR HEARING |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The appeal filed by three respondents (husband and his parents) challenging a lower court's domestic violence protection order and interim maintenance direction was dismissed. The Additional District and Sessions Judge upheld the Gram Nyayalaya's ex-parte order under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, which restrained the respondents from committing physical cruelty and directed the husband to pay ₹3,000 monthly maintenance to his wife. The court found the petitioner's allegations of domestic violence, dowry demands, and infidelity accusations prima facie credible, and determined the interim maintenance was reasonable given her lack of income and the husband's financial capacity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The appeal filed by three respondents (husband and his parents) challenging a lower court's domestic violence protection order and interim maintenance direction was dismissed. The Additional District and Sessions Judge upheld the Gram Nyayalaya's ex-parte order under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, which restrained the respondents from committing physical cruelty and directed the husband to pay ₹3,000 monthly maintenance to his wife. The court found the petitioner's allegations of domestic violence, dowry demands, and infidelity accusations prima facie credible, and determined the interim maintenance was reasonable given her lack of income and the husband's financial capacity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
More from this court
Addl. District Court, Muvattupuzha/Rent Control Appellate Authority All courts →Explore other courts