SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(All) 638

C.A.RAHIM
SADIQUE ALI – Appellant
Versus
APAR SESSIONS NAIYAI DHEESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.A.QAYUM

C. A. RAHIM, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been directed against the judgment and order dated 1. 10. 1991 passed in criminal Case No. 94/91 passed by the learned Magistrate and the judgment and order dated 11. 11. 1992 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No. 479/91. Execution proceeding No. 110/83 was continuing since long and after change of status due to divorce an application was filed by the husband before the learned Magistrate for cancellation of the execution proceedings and the same was rejected on 1. 10. 1991.

( 2 ) A revision was preferred by the petitioner before the Court of Sessions and by an order dated 11. 11. 1992 the Addl. Sessions Judge, Basti, dismissed it on the ground that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (hereinafter called as the Act) has no retrospective operation. Both the Courts below referred Section 7 of the said Act wherein it has been provided that every application of a divorced woman under Section 125 or under Section 127 Cr. P. C. pending before a Magistrate on the date of the commencement of this Act shall be disposed of by the such Magistrate in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Acco












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top