High Court of Orissa dismissed a revision petition filed under Sections 401 and 307 Cr.P.C. challenging domestic violence orders. The Court found no illegality in the lower court orders. The matter was disposed of due to lack of instruction.
The CRLREV No.186 of 2012 was disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLREV No.186 of 2012
Sri Ananta Kumar Panda …. Petitioners and another
Mr. Gyana Ranjan Sahoo, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B. Baug, Advocate -versus-
Kumari Manorama Panda …. Opp. Party
None
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
08.11.2023 Hybrid Mode
Page 1 of 2
// 2 //
jyostna
(M.S. Sahoo)
Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOSTNARANI MAJHEE Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Nov-2023 18:00:27
Page 2 of 2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petition under Sections 401 and 307 Cr.P.C. challenges the impugned orders under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, disclose any illegality warranting inter
Whether the Court should allow the revision petition filed under Sections 401 and 307 Cr.P.C. to challenge the lower court orders.
Whether the petitioners have sufficient instruction to prosecute the revision petition.
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Ananta Kumar Panda
Kumari Manorama Panda
M.S. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
