IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Revision No.354 of 2016 Reserved on: 17.03.2026 Date of Decision: 04.04.2026 Tulsi Ram ....Petitioner Versus Meena Kumari ....Respondent Coram r Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes For the petitioner : Ms B.S. Chauhan, Sr.

Advocate, with Mr Sahil Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent/ : Mr Atul Verma, Advocate, for State the respondent Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 05.09.2016, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Mandi, Camp at Jogindernagar, District Mandi, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) vide which the order dated 15.01.2016 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate,

1. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

First Class, Jogindernagar, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P.

(learned Trial Court) was upheld. (Parties shall hereinaft.er be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience. H

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the applicant filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domesti