Back
SUBHENDU SAMANTA
Sumita Acharya – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
The case involves a revisional application filed against orders related to proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, specifically Section 12, and the related appellate judgments (!) .
The revisional applications were filed by both the wife and the husband, challenging the orders passed by the Magistrate and affirmed by the First Appellate Court (!) (!) .
The Court observed that the earlier order was passed ex parte but considered on merit, including the merits of the husband's case, and no clerical or arithmetical errors were found (!) .
The Court noted that the primary purpose of proceedings under the PWDV Act is to establish a domestic relationship, and the report of a Protection Officer is a crucial element in passing orders (!) .
The petitioner’s argument that the order should be set aside due to alleged lack of opportunity or procedural errors was rejected, as the Court found that proper service and opportunity were provided (!) .
The Court emphasized that in proceedings under the PWDV Act, the question of whether a marriage was legally solemnized is not necessarily determinative; proof of a domestic relationship suffices (!) .
The Court held that the challenge to the original order was barred under the applicable procedural provisions and that the order passed in the earlier revision was final and binding (!) .
The Court dismissed the revision applications, reaffirming that the orders of the Magistrate and the First Appellate Court were lawful and proper, and that the petitioner’s claims regarding the marital status were not relevant to the proceedings under the PWDV Act (!) .
The petitioner was directed to comply with the earlier Court order, and failure to do so could lead to legal consequences, including enforcement of the order (!) .
Connected pending applications, if any, were also disposed of, and any stay orders issued earlier were vacated (!) .
These points summarize the Court’s reasoning, procedural findings, and final disposition regarding the revisional applications under the PWDV Act.
JUDGMENT :
Subhendu Samanta, J.
1. CRR 3520 of 2018 has been preferred against the order dated September 15, 2018 passed by the learned First Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No. 243 of 2017 affirming the order dated September 5, 2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Alipore in Case No. C-9584 of 2013 under Section 12 of PWDV Act, 2005.
2. This criminal revisional application is disposed of by virtue of order of this Court dated February 27, 2020. One application being CRAN 1 of 2020 submitted by the opposite party for restoration or recalling of the order dated February 27, 2020.
3. CRR 3571 of 2018 has been preferred against the judgment dated September 15, 2018 passed by the First Appellant Court in criminal appeal No.202 of 2017 aggrieved by the judgment dated September 5, 2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Alipore in connection with complaint case No. C-9584 of 2013 instituted under Section 12 of PWDV Act, 2005.
4. CRR 3520 of 2018 was preferred by the wife and CRR 3571 of 2018 was preferred by the husband.
5. As both the criminal revisional application is based on the same order of learned Judicial Magistrate passed in same proceeding, so
Magistrate's rejection of Section 156(3) CrPC application is final order, revisable under Section 397 CrPC before Sessions Court; writ under Article 226 not entertained due to efficacious alternate r....
Domestic violence - Maintenance - Court shall not further investigate or adjudicate into amount of maintenance awarded as the same has again been considered at length by the lower Courts by examining....
The court affirmed that domestic violence encompasses various forms of abuse, and maintenance should be awarded from the date of the application under the DV Act, not the date of the order.
The revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. is available to challenge the order of issuance of process, as clarified by the Supreme Court.
A revision against the appellate order passed by the Sessions Court in a domestic violence case is maintainable under Secs. 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure code.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the aggrieved person has the right to seek relief under the Domestic Violence Act at any stage, even if living separately from the respondent.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
