Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
1894/2010 on 2 July, 2010
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
88. 02-07-10
g.n.
CRR No. 1894 of 2010
Mr. Md. Abdul Alim ... for the petitioner
Invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, the petitioner has moved this court for quashing of a proceeding under the provision of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
It is contended by the Learned Counsel of the petitioner that after breaking the marital tie with the petitioner by pronouncing Talak, the opposite party herein on September 12, 2009 instituted a criminal case against the present petitioner alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and thereafter on September 22, 2009 she instituted the aforesaid case under the provisions of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It is further contended after the marital relations between the parties stand dissolved no application under the provisions of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is legally maintainable. It is an admitted position that upon receipt of the notice relating to the impugned proceeding the petitioner has already appeared before the Learned Court below and filed his rejoinder, but till date no hearing has been commenced. Whether the marital tie between the parties has been dissolved by pronouncement of Talak or not is a pure question of facts and is a matter to 2 be tested by the original Court. Moreover, in the impugned proceedings the rights and liabilities of the parties have not been finally adjudicated and no final order has been passed and the case is at an interlocutory stage. Now, in view of specific statutory bar contained in Section 397(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, interference with an interlocutory order is not permissible, unless the impugned proceeding is manifestly illegal and without jurisdiction. Thus, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned proceeding.
This criminal revision has no merit and accordingly stands dismissed.
However, this order will not preclude the petitioner to take the points taken in this application and to prove the same in accordance with law in course of hearing of the impugned proceeding.
The learned court below is directed to make all endeavours to conclude the proceeding as expeditiously as possible.
(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.)