Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging interim maintenance orders under the Domestic Violence Act was dismissed for non-prosecution after repeated absence of petitioner and non-compliance with notice conditions.
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.
CRM-M-29451-2022 (O&M) - 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
226
CRM-M-29451-2022 (O&M)
Date of Decision:17.12.2024
Chetan
.… Petitioner
Versus
Rekha
.... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present: - None for the petitioner. ***
NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of order dated 09.05.2019 (Annexure P-6) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class, Bahadurgarh whereby application for grant of interim maintenance filed by the respondent has been allowed; AND order dated 23.11.2021 (Annexure P-8) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar vide which the revision petition filed against the order dated 09.05.2019, has also been dismissed.
On 07.09.2022, following order was passed by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court:-
“The petitioner has assailed the order dated 09.05.2019 passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bahadurgarh and the order dated 23.11.2021 passed by the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jhajjar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in terms of the order dated 09.05.2019, the interim maintenance @ Rs.4,000/- and a sum of Rs. 3,000/- on account of alternative accommodation was awarded to the respondent in
DIVYANSHI 2024.12.17 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-29451-2022 (O&M) - 2 -
the proceedings under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The petitioner had assailed the order by filing a revision and in terms of the order dated 23.11.2021, the amount with regard to alternative accommodation has been reduced to Rs. 2500/- per month. It has been argued that at the earlier instance, the respondent had instituted a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and the same has been dismissed vide order dated 22.05.2018, Annexure P-1.
Notice of motion, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposit a sum of Rs. 30,000/- on account of litigation expenses within a period of 2 weeks in the Registry. Adjourned to 22.11.2022.”
Office report shows that the above said order has not been complied with till date.
Perusal of the order sheets shows that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on the last 2 dates of hearing i.e. 05.09.2023 and 02.07.2024. Today also, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, it can safely be presumed that the petitioner or his counsel is not interested in pursuing the present petition.
In view of the above, the present petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
17.12.2024
Divyanshi
( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No
DIVYANSHI 2024.12.17 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chetan
Rekha
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
