BRIJESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. - (1.) THIS petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the order dated 23.8.2011, passed in Appeal No.86 of 2011 (Vijay Kumar Pathak Vs. Ram Dulari @ Urmila) passed by Additional Sessions Judge - VIIth, Faizabad.
(2.) IT may be mentioned that petitioner has alleged herself to be legally wedded wife of opposite party no.2, Vijay Kumar Pathak and the marriage was solemnized in the year 2003 according to Hindu customary traditions. As per petitioner, she was ill treated by the opposite party no.2 on 01.11.2008 and then she left for her parental house. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a complaint under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the Judicial Magistrate -IIIrd Faizabad alleging serious allegations against the opposite party no.2 with request to pass suitable orders. As per petitioner, after hearing both the parties, learned Court below passed judgment on 31.3.2011 and allowed the petition partially.
(3.) THAT order was challenged by way of appeal no.86 of 2011 and the appeal was allowed vide order dated 23.8.2011 and the order passed by the Court below in case under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was set -aside. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner came up by way of this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the entire record.;