Back
2010 Supreme(UK) 783
2011 (1) UC 66
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.
Smt. Ruchi Grover -Petitioner
Versus
Amit Grover, S/o Shri G.P. Grover Rio C784, Vikaspuri, New Delhi. -Respondents
Criminal Misc. Application(C482) No.1183 of 2010
Decided on : 07.12.2010
Shri Pawan Mishra, Advocate, present for the petitioner.
Shri S.S. Chauhan , Advocate, present for the respondents.
Courts can uphold orders directing the filing of documents under section 91 of Cr.P.C. in cases related to domestic violence.
Headnote:
Section 91 of Cr.P.C. - Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Court directs petitioner to file documents under section 91 of Cr.P.C. - Appellate court's order upheld
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a complaint under the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, alleging cruelty and neglect by the respondent. The respondent sought direction from the court to file financial statements and details of accounts under section 91 of Cr.P.C.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., upholding the appellate court's order directing the petitioner to file the requested documents.
Issues: Challenge to appellate court's order, direction to file documents under section 91 of Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The direction by the appellate court under section 91 of Cr.P.C. cannot be said to be illegal.
Final Decision: The petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed summarily.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized:
-
The court upheld the validity of orders directing the filing of documents under section 91 of the Cr.P.C. in cases related to domestic violence, including those under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (!) (!) .
-
The petitioner filed a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, alleging cruelty and neglect by the respondent. The respondent moved an application under section 91 of Cr.P.C. seeking directions to file financial statements and account details (!) (!) .
-
The appellate court directed the petitioner to file the requested documents, and this order was upheld by the court, with the final decision dismissing the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging this order (!) (!) .
-
The court clarified that the direction to file financial and account details under section 91 of Cr.P.C. was not illegal, especially since the petitioner had also sought monetary reliefs under the Act (!) (!) .
-
The petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. was dismissed summarily, with no opinion expressed on the final merits of the case (!) .
-
The case involved the respondent's request for financial disclosures, including statements from specific bank accounts and fixed deposit receipts, which the court found to be a legitimate procedural step in the context of the proceedings under the Act (!) (!) .
-
The court emphasized that the order requiring the petitioner to file documents was consistent with the legal framework and upheld the appellate court's decision (!) (!) .
If you need further analysis or specific legal advice regarding this case, please let me know.
Prafulla C. Pant, J. :
Heard.
2. By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.11.2010, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/6th Fast Track Court, Dehradun, in criminal appeal no. 87 of 2010, whereby said court has set aside the order dated 09.08.2010, passed by the trial court, and directed the petitioner to file the documents under section 91 of Cr.P.C., as prayed in application 20B, before the trial court.
3. Brief facts of the case are that, the present petitioner filed the complaint under sections 18, 19, 20, and 22 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, alleging that she has been subjected to cruelty, and the respondent (Amit Grover)has neglected her to maintain.
4. By moving application under section 20B before the trial court under section 91 of Cr.P.C., (copy of which Annex. 2 to the petition) the respondents have sought direction of the court to the complainant to file statements of her two PPF accounts (one at Delhi, and another at Dehradun), details of her balances in savings account with State Bank of India, and Centurion Bank of Punjab, and also sought to get filed details of fixed deposit receipts in the aforesaid two Banks. The accounts no. are specifically disclosed in the application.
5. Since, the petitioner has also sought direction from the Magistrate under section 20 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which relates to monitary reliefs, the direction by the appellate court vide impugned order dated 19.11.2010, cannot be said to be illegal.
6. Therefore, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is dismissed summarily.
