BISMITA SAIKIA @ BISMITA SAIKIA DUTTA Vs. PRANJAL DUTTA AND 3 ORS
LAWS(GAU)-2018-4-34
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on April 20,2018

Bismita Saikia @ Bismita Saikia Dutta Appellant
VERSUS
Pranjal Dutta And 3 Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ajit Borthakur, J. - (1.) Heard Ms. A. Devi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Borah, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) By this revision petition under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the aggrieved person/petitioner seeks setting aside and quashing of the impugned judgment & order, dated 18.10.2016, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, in Criminal Appeal No. 27/2016, upholding the order, dated 05.01.2016, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Guwahati, whereby application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005(for short, the DV Act) has been dismissed.
(3.) The aggrieved person/petitioner's case, in a nut-shell, is that, on 18.11.2015, she filed an application/complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act, in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati, whereupon Misc. Case No. 161 M/2015 was registered, seeking reliefs under Sections 18, 19, 22 and 23 of the said Act against the respondents. The respondents contested the said proceeding by filing a written objection, contending, inter alia, that the application/complaint is not maintainable as the alleged aggrieved person/complainant is the divorced wife of the respondent No. 1 and that the same is filed without complying with the procedure laid in Form 11 Rule 6(1) of the DV Act. The learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, to whom the complaint was made over for trial, by order, dated 05.01.2016, dismissed it with cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid to the respondents. Against the aforesaid dismissal order, the alleged aggrieved person/complainant preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 27/2016 before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati, which was eventually made over to the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati, for disposal. The learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati, after hearing the learned counsel of both sides and consideration of the relevant materials on record, dismissed the appeal vide the impugned judgment & order, dated 18.10.2016.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.