CRL.REV.P. 231/2020 Page 1 of 6

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on : 03.03.2023

% Pronounced on : 01.06.2023

+

CRL.REV.P. 231/2020

NEHA CHATURVEDI

…..Petitioner

Through:

Mr. R. Gopal, Advocate.

versus

STATE & ANR.

.... Respondents

Through:

Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP for the

State.

Ms. Niharika Ahluwalia, Ms. Ishita

Deswal and Mr. Arpit Sharma,

Advocates for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR

JUDGMENT

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.

1.

The present revision petition U/s 397, 401 R/w Section 482 Cr.P.C.

has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

Digitally Signed

By:INDU BHATTI

Signing Date:01.06.2023

17:05:45

Signature Not Verified

CRL.REV.P. 231/2020 Page 2 of 6

2. The petitioner by way of the present revision petition has challenged

the impugned order dated 18.12.2019 passed by the Ld. Metropolitan

Magistrate, Mahila Court-02/East District, Karkardooma Court, Delhi vide

which the Ld. MM, Mahila Court-02 has dismissed the complaint filed by

the petitioner U/s 31 (1) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence

Act, 2005. This complaint had been filed by the petitioner for the

prosecution of accused husband on the ground that he had committed breach

of protection order dated 27.11.2014 vide which the Ld. MM Mahila Court,

East District had disposed of the application filed by the petitioner under

Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 on account of mediation

settlement between the parties.

3.

The said application under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act,

2005 was disposed of by the Ld. MM Mahila Court, East District as per the

terms and conditions of the mediation settlement. The petitioner has alleged

that her husband (respondent No.2 herein) has failed to comply with the

Digitally Signed

By:INDU BHATTI

Signing Date:01.06.2023

17:05:45

Signature Not Verified

CRL.REV.P. 231/2020 Page 3 of 6

terms of the mediation settlement and again indulged into domestic violence

which led to filing of a subsequent complaint under Section 31 (1) of

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This complaint

has been dismissed by the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-

02/East District, Karkardooma Court, Delhi vide impugned order dated

18.12.2019 which is under challenged in the present revision petition.

4.

I have heard the Ld. counsel for the petitioner, Ld. APP for the State,

Ld. counsel for the respondent No. 2 and perused the records of this case.

5.

The relevant para of the impugned order dated 18.12.2019 reads as

follows:

Digitally Signed

By:INDU BHATTI

Signing Date:01.06.2023

17:05:45

Signature Not Verified

CRL.REV.P. 231/2020 Page 4 of 6

File be consigned to record room after due compliance.”

6.

Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,

2005 reads as follows:

7.

Ld. MM in the impugned order has observed that Section 31 (1) of

PWDV Act is attracted only in case of breach of protection order or interim

protection order by the respondent. It is further observed in the impugned

order that since the breach entails penal consequences, therefore specific

Digitally Signed

By:INDU BHATTI

Signing Date:01.06.2023

17:05:45

Signature Not Verified

CRL.REV.P. 231/2020 Page 5 of 6

protection order have to be shown to have been breached by the respondent.

Since no specific protection order was passed against the respondent

(husband) on 27.11.2014, so the Ld. MM obser