P.K.LOHRA,J. - (1.) Petitioners have laid this revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. to challenge order dated 29.11.2017, passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases) Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short, 'learned appellate Court), whereby learned appellate Court has confirmed order dated 07.09.2017, passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.6, Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short, 'learned trial Court').
(2.) Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that first respondent-applicant filed a petition against petitioners (non-applicants) under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, 'Act of 2005') before the learned trial Court. During trial, on behalf of respondent-applicant, her affidavit was tendered in the form of evidence instead of appearing personally in the witness box. Feeling dismayed with the filing of affidavit, petitioners (non-applicants) submitted objection before the learned trial Court. In the application, it is, inter-alia, pleaded by petitioners (non-applicants) that proceedings under Section 12 of the Act of 2005 are akin to the proceedings under Sections 125, 126 and 127 Cr.P.C., and therefore, procedure for recording evidence in summons case is to be adhered to. With this sort of objection, the petitioners (non-applicants) have craved for rejecting evidence in the form of affidavit submitted by respondent-applicant. Learned trial Court, after considering the application in the light of Section 28(2) of the Act of 2005, rejected the application of petitioners.
(3.) Feeling dismayed with the order of learned trial Court, petitioners preferred an appeal under Section 29 of the Act of 2005 before the learned appellate Court but the said effort of the petitioners also proved abortive and the learned appellate Court rejected the appeal. While affirming the order of learned trial Court, learned appellate Court has also relied on sub-section (2) of Section 28 of the Act of 2005.;