Decided on October 16,2012

Naveen Ram And Others Appellant
VIMLA Respondents


- (1.) Having heard learned counsel for the revisionist and on going through the judgment passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh and affirmed by Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, it transpires that Naveen Ram (revisionist no. 1) was in company of Vimla Devi (respondent), nonetheless he was already married. At the same time, Smt. Vimla Devi was also wedded second time with Naveen Ram while her first husband Pushkar Ram was alive. It has been adduced in the evidence by Mohini Devi (mother of Vimla Devi) that her daughter got divorce from her previous husband in Tehsil.
(2.) Learned counsel for the revisionists has argued that this divorce was not in accordance with law, as envisaged under the Hindu Marriage Act. This argument is not acceptable for the reason that under the Domestic Violence Act it is not necessary for providing relief to a woman, that such woman should be legally wedded wife of a man against whom relief is being claimed.
(3.) It has been argued on behalf of revisionists that Naveen Ram and his parents were not rendered opportunity to cross examine Smt. Vimla Devi but after perusing the trial court's judgment, it is explicit and evident in so many words that opportunities of hearing were rendered by the trial Judge, time and again, to Naveen Ram but he did avail the same. Now, he cannot frustrate the entire findings of the court below just on the pretext that no opportunity was rendered to crossexamine the witnesses. ;

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