Dismissed

Rajiv Goel v. Suman Rani and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Oct 2024CRR/775/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision petition challenging a common appellate judgment in DV Act proceedings was withdrawn by the petitioner on the basis that proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act are civil in nature, making such revision petitions under Section 397 Cr.P.C. not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedy within four weeks.

Rajiv Goel Vs Suman Rani and Anr. — Domestic Violence | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRR-775-2020 (O&M) -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

215

¶4

CRR-775-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.10.2024

Dr. Rajiv Goel

.… Petitioner

Versus

Sumani Rani and another .... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶10

Present: - Mr. Parveen Moudgil, Advocate for Ms. Sunita Nain, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶13

Challenge in the present petition is to common judgment dated 18.09.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra whereby appeals filed by the parties against the judgment dated 27.10.2016 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra in a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, have been dismissed.

¶14

At the very outset, learned proxy counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to take recourse to the appropriate remedy within a period of four weeks from today, in accordance with law, in view of judgment dated 24.04.2023 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M19553-2023 titled as ‘ Jaspal Kaur alias Pinki and others vs. State of Punjab and another ’, wherein it has been held that ‘ the proceedings under Section 12 of the DV Act are civil in nature, therefore, a petition

¶15

DIVYANSHI 2024.10.16 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CRR-775-2020 (O&M) -2-

¶17

under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C., assailing the order passed in complaint filed under the provisions of DV Act are not maintainable’.

¶18

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty aforesaid.

¶19

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶20

16.10.2024 (NIDHI GUPTA) Divyanshi JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶21

DIVYANSHI 2024.10.16 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajiv Goel v. Suman Rani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Goel v. Suman Rani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parmeet Singh Vs Manpreet Kaur and Anr.

Deepak Kumar Vs Seema

Luxmi Devi Vs Sandeep and Ors.

Balwinder Singh Saggu Vs State of Punjab and Others

Digvijay Singh Vs State of Haryana and Another

Harbans Kaur and Others Vs State of Punjab and Ors.