S.C.DHARMADHIKARI
Chintan Upadhyay – Appellant
Versus
Hema Upadhyay – Respondent
1] Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent rule made returnable forthwith. Heard parties.
2] By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner – original accused is challenging the order dated 8th January 2013 issuing process, which order has been passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 21st Court, Bandra, Mumbai in C.C.No.3493/SS/2012.
3] The respondent No.1 – complainant filed a complaint alleging offences punishable under section 4 read with 6 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 (hereinafter for short “said Act”) and section 292(2)(a) of the Indian Penal Code.
4] The complaint proceeds on the footing that the petitioner and the respondent No.1 were married but they are residing separately in the matrimonial home at 102, Mittal Ocean View, Juhu Tara Road, Santacruz (West), Mumbai 400 054.
5] They are co-owners of the said flat. The respondent No.1 alleges that she resides in the master bed room whereas the petitioner resides in the other bed room. They have common hall, balcony and kitchen. The petitioner accused also has a house in
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.