MWPRD Act | Divorced Lady Must Reside Within Jurisdictional Limit Of Magistrate To Avail Benefit Of Act: Kerala HC Denies Relief To Malaysian Citizen

The Court however noted that the complainant was a citizen of Malaysia, and her marriage and divorce also took place in Malaysia.

The Court relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Jeewanti Pandey v Kishan Chandra Pandey (1982) where it was held that residence is a place where a person lives and can be defined as a place where one lives for a considerable period of time as distinguished from the place where he just works or a place of casual visit.

Justice A. Badharudeen observed:

“Reading the above decision, the term 'residence' is generally understood as referring to a person in connection with the place where he lives, and may be defined as one who resides in a place or one who dwells in a place for a considerable amount of time as distinguished from one who merely works in a certain locality or comes casually for a visit and the place of work or place of casual visit are different from the place of 'residence'. The term 'residence' literally means the fact of living in a particular place.”

Accordingly, the Court held that the complainant would not come under the definition of a 'divorced woman resides' within the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. 

Counsel for the Petitioner: Advocates K. Shibili Naha, A. Lowsy, Nivea K. G.

Counsel for the Respondent: Advocates Arun Bose D., K. Viswan, Sooraj S.

Case No: Crl. M. C. No. 8481 of 2022

Case Title: Sahesh Rafeeque v Nural Inshira Binti Abdul Kareem

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 472