Mahek Muazzam Karbari After Marraige Name Mahek Sharukh Shaekh vs Sharuk Ismail Shekh — 15/2024
Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act Section 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 20th April 2026.
Cri.M.A. - Criminal Misc. Application
CNR: MHRG120002492024
Next Hearing
20th April 2026
e-Filing Number
16-05-2024
Filing Number
223/2024
Filing Date
17-05-2024
Registration No
15/2024
Registration Date
17-05-2024
Court
Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C.,Murud
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr. Dvn. and J. M. F. C. Murud
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Mahek Muazzam Karbari After Marraige Name Mahek Sharukh Shaekh
Adv. Patil D.N.
Respondent(s)
Sharuk Ismail Shekh
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr. Dvn. and J. M. F. C. Murud
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 30-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 20-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 17-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary: The application under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was partly allowed. The court found prima facie evidence of domestic violence (refusal of maintenance after separation) and granted interim maintenance of Rs. 4,000 per month to the applicant and her 11-month-old daughter from May 17, 2024 until case conclusion. However, the claim for Rs. 1,00,000 toward delivery expenses was rejected due to insufficient evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The application under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was partly allowed. The court found prima facie evidence of domestic violence (refusal of maintenance after separation) and granted interim maintenance of Rs. 4,000 per month to the applicant and her 11-month-old daughter from May 17, 2024 until case conclusion. However, the claim for Rs. 1,00,000 toward delivery expenses was rejected due to insufficient evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts