Disposed¶28

Chandrani Bagchi v. Malobika Bagchi

Gauhati HC12 Jun 2025Crl.Pet./29/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; Crl.Pet./29/2023; Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund; order dated 13-06-2025; Section 482 CrPC quashing petition; domestic violence proceeding D.V. Case No. 71(M)/2022; JMFC Kamrup (M); ex parte accommodation order dated 30.12.2022 passed without notice; Section 25(2) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005; petition No. 9066; revocation petition dated 17.01.2023; remand to Trial Court; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 482 CrPC disposed of without quashing; both parties directed to appear before the Trial Court within one month and place submissions on the petition under Section 25(2) of the PWDV Act, on which the learned Trial Court may pass any order in accordance with law. ¶28

Chandrani Bagchi Vs Malobika Bagchi — Domestic Violence | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned proceeding in D.V. Case No. 71(M)/2022, including the order dated 30.12.2022 of the learned JMFC, Kamrup (M) directing the petitioner to accommodate the respondent in her residence without hearing her, should be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. +1 more

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The Court deemed it appropriate to remand the case and directed both parties to appear before the Court within one month from that date.

¶27

Key takeaways

Both parties were to place their submissions on the petition under Section 25(2) of PWDV Act, and the learned Trial Court may pass any order in accordance with law.ratio¶27
In terms of the above observation, the petition stands disposed of (no quashing was ordered).ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of the proceeding in D.V. Case No. 71(M)/2022 and the order dated 30.12.2022 of the learned JMFC, Kamrup (M), by which the petitioner was directed to accommodate the respondent in her residence without hearing her; the impugned order had been passed without any notice to the petitioner despite the Trial Court's order dated 20.10.2022 directing issuance of notice. Scrutinising the trial record, the Court noted that a petition No. 9066 under Section 25(2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 had been filed, against which the respondent had objected, contending that setting aside the order would render her homeless. Rather than deciding the quashing prayer, the Court remanded the matter, directing both parties to appear before the Trial Court within one month and place their submissions on the Section 25(2) petition, leaving the Trial Court free to pass any order in accordance with law; the petition stood disposed of.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010007602023

2025:GAU-AS:7951

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : Crl.Pet./29/2023

¶6

CHANDRANI BAGCHI

¶7

W/O- SRI ABHIJIT BAGCHI, D/O- LATE SATYABRATA DAS, R/O- KRISHNA NAGAR HILL SIDE, MALIGAON GOSHALA, P.S- JALUKBARI, DISTKAMRUP(M), ASSAM, GHY- 11

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

MALOBIKA BAGCHI

¶10

W/O- AMIT BAGCHI, PERMANENT R/O- HOUSE NO. 99, KRISHNA NAGAR HILL SIDE, MALIGAON GOSHALA, P.S- JALUKBARI, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, GHY- 11, PRESENT R/O- H NO. 19, NIJARA PATH, BATTALION GATE, DIST- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM, GHY- 781018

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MRS R BEGUM,MR. F A HASSAN,MD E AHMED,MR. S C BISWAS

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A TEWARI, MS. D SHARMA,MS. K HAZARIKA,MS. C DUTTA,MS. M BAISHYA,MS. G DUGAR

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 13-06-2025

¶16

Heard learned counsel Mr. P. Kataki for the petitioner Smti. Chandrani

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

Bagchi and learned counsel Mr. A. Tewari for the respondent Smti. Malobika Bagchi.

¶19

The petitioner has filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with prayer for quashing the impugned proceeding of D.V. Case No. 71^M /2022. The petitioner is basically aggrieved by the order dated 30.12.2022 passed by the learned JMFC, Kamrup (M) whereby an order was passed against the petitioner to accommodate the respondent in her residence without hearing the petitioner. Annexure-6 is the order impugned by the petitioner.

¶20

The petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the Annexures – 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this petition which reflects orders dated 09.05.2022, 09.06.2022, 08.08.2022 and 20.10.2022 and the final impugned order dated 30.12.2022.

¶21

A case of domestic violence has been brought up by the respondent against the petitioner and cognizance was taken and notices were issued to the petitioner. The petitioner did not appear before the Trial Court on 09.06.2022 in connection with D.V. Case No. 71/2022. Vide order dated 20.10.2022, the Court directed the respondent to take steps to issue notice to the petitioner but without any notice being issued against the petitioner, the impugned order was passed against the petitioner on 30.12.2022.

¶22

It is further submitted that the petitioner has already filed a petition on 17.01.2023 for revocation of the impugned order dated 30.12.2022 and 09.06.2022.

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

6. I have scrutinized the scanned copies of the Trial Court Record.

¶25

The order dated 17.01.2023 reflects that a petition being petition No. 9066 under Section 25(2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 has been filed and an objection has been filed by the respondent against this petition.

¶26

The respondent has submitted that if this order is set aside and quashed, the respondent will be rendered homeless.

¶27

Thereby, I deem it appropriate to remand this case and direct both the parties to appear before the Court within one month from today and place their submissions on the petition under Section 25(2) of PWDV Act and the learned Trial Court may pass any order in accordance with law.

¶28

In terms of the above observation, this petition stands disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Chandrani Bagchi v. Malobika Bagchi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrani Bagchi v. Malobika Bagchi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahim Ali Sheikh @ Rahim Ali Vs the State of Assam

Irungbam Anil Meetei Vs the Union of India and Anr.

Irungbam Anil Meetei Vs the Union of India and Anr.

Samad Ali Vs the State of Assam

Amit Bor Saikia Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Hifjur Rahman Vs the State of Assam