Dismissed

Tulsi Kewat v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Oct 2020W.P.(Cr.)/23/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was a criminal writ petition challenging enforcement proceedings under Section 128 Cr.P.C. The court held that since the civil court was already seised of the underlying matrimonial issue, this writ application could not adjudicate it. The matter was dismissed as pending before the Additional Family Court.

What did the court decide?

The criminal writ application stands disposed of; the petitioner is directed to produce documents before the Additional Family Court.

Tulsi Kewat Vs the State of Jharkhand — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P. (Cr.) No. 23 of 2020

¶3

Tulsi Kewat…..….......

¶4

Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Deputy Chief Personnel Manager (Personnel) Koyala Bhawan, Dhanbad

¶8

Chief General Manager, Area No. 4, BCCL, Dhanbad

¶9

Area Personnel Manager, Area No.4, BCCL, Dhanbad

¶10

Yashoda Devi……….. Respondents(s)

¶11

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen

¶12

Through:-Video Conferencing

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhijit Kumar, AC to SC-VII

¶14

4/05.10.2020 The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through video conferencing today at 11.00 A.M. They have no complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner prays to ignore the defects and

¶16

take up the matter on merits.

¶17

Defects stand ignored for the present.

¶18

In this application, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire proceedings of Enforcement Case No. 26 of 2019, pending before the Additional Family Court, Dhanbad, which is a proceeding under Section 128 Cr. P.C.

¶19

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the competent civil court in Title Suit No. 45 of 2007 has already declared that Yashoda Devi is not the wife of the petitioner. Thus, according to him, continuation of the enforcement case is absolutely bad in law and without jurisdiction.

¶20

From the submission made by the parties, I find that the enforcement case, which has been filed under Section 128 Cr.P.C. is pending before the Court below. The petitioner is at liberty to produce all the documents before the court concerned, who will consider the same and will pass a reasoned order. This Court cannot adjudicate the aforesaid issue when the matter is pending before the Additional Family Court, Dhanbad.

¶21

This criminal writ application stands disposed of.

¶22

( Ananda Sen, J )

¶23

Mukund/-cp.3

Tulsi Kewat v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tulsi Kewat v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratan Lal Mahto Alias Ratan Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ajay Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Janardan Pandey Vs Human Resources Department

Idul Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rojina Khatoon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Baidyanath Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand through Director General of Police