Point of law : When the case is made out by the petitioner for sending the matter back to the Court concerned for fresh consideration.

ORDER :

1. Both these Criminal Revision Applications are preferred under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 11.11.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.116 of 2017 passed by learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Ahmedabad.

2. Criminal Revision Application No.159 of 2020 is filed by one Balvantbhai Chhaganbhai Khastiya, who was original respondent No.2. Since both these Criminal Revision Applications are arising out of the very same common order, same are being disposed of by the present common and order.

3. The background of facts which has given rise to the present proceedings is that the petitioner got married with respondent No.2 on 3.12.1998 at Dhandhuka, District Ahmedabad and it is alleged that in the said marriage, father of the respondent No.2 gave jewelry, cloths, household furniture to the extent of Rs.2 lakh by way of dowry, but soon after the marriage, the husband of respondent No.2 demanded more dowry amount and on account of which, started harassing. It was further alleged that out of the wedlock, one female and two male children born. But, according to respondent No.2, who was continuously subjected to harassment, and since respondent No.2’s father could not fulfill the said demand, she was kicked out of her matrimonial house. But, on account of family pressure and social settlement, she was brought back to the matrimonial house but, finally, in the year 2012, according to respondent No.2, she was thrown out of her matrimonial house and then started residing with her father at her parental house.

4. This dispute has given rise to filing of the proceedings by respondent No.2, being Criminal Misc. Application No.220 of 2012 under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the proceeding have been initiated on 11.12.2012. After due adjudication of the proceedings, the Court below was pleased to pass an order on 1.7.2017, whereby the application of the respondent No.2 came to be partly allowed and direction was given upon the petitioner to pay maintenance to respondent No.2.

5. Simultaneously, the petitioner also filed Hindu Marriage Petition No.21 of 2014 (old number), which was later on newly numbered as HMP No.5 of 2017 under the provisions of Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act and the said proceedings in which the respondent No.2 appeared, participated and submitted reply and after considering the documentary evidence as well as oral evidence, learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Dhandhuka was pleased to pass an order on 20.11.2018 and declared the marriage of the petitioner and respondent No.2 to be dissolved and the parties have to bear their own costs. It is further asserted by the petitioner in the Revision Application that respondent No.2 had executed a registered declaration on 10.9.2014, wherein she has declared that she has relinquished her right from the share of the property which was to be held by her husband, i.e. petitioner, for the land bearing Survey No.101, situated at village Rayka and that objection which was raised came to be withdrawn and it was declared by her that her husband has separately arranged the maintenance and has given silent consent in the deed. It is further asserted and came out from the averment of Revision Application No.159 of 2020 that respondent No.2 had initiated that proceedings under the Act which were partly allowed by learned Magistrate on 1.7.2017, being Criminal Misc. Application No.220 of 2012, whereby an allowance of Rs.2,000/- per month is to be paid and to arrange one residential accommodation for respondent No.2 as per her status and Rs.2,000/- was awarded towards mental harassment as well as costs and expenses.

6. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, filed Criminal Appeal No.85 of 2017 before the Appellate Court at Ahmedabad and respondent No.2 also filed Criminal Appeal No.116 of 2017 against the very sam