Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sh.Om Parkash Awasthi And Another vs Smt.Nidhi Awasthi on 6 November, 2017
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No. 157 of 2014
Decided on: November 6, 2017
.
___________________________________________________________
Sh.Om Parkash Awasthi and another
.........Petitioners
Versus
Smt.Nidhi Awasthi.
...Respondent
____________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting1?
____________________________________________________________
For the petitioner: r Mr. Mahesh Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondent: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Instant petition filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482, CrPC is directed against the judgment dated 16.6.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge (Forest), Shimla in Criminal Appeal RBT No.118-S/10 of 13/12 affirming the order dated 31.8.2012 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. I, Shimla in case No. 18-3 of 2012, whereby learned court below, while considering the prayer of the applicant for interim relief made in application under Sections 12. 18. 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter, 'Act'), directed the respondents not to Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 18:25:32 :::HCHP -2-interfere directly or indirectly into day-to-day life of petitioner and not to commit any act of domestic violence like abusing her or .
mentally torturing her. The learned Trial Court also directed the respondents to provide one bed room and kitchen alongwith the provision of bathroom, toilet etc. in the shared household, which shall be exclusive for user of the petitioner.
2. It is not in dispute that the respondent has approached this Court against the interim order passed by this Court and the main matter is still pending.
3. A perusal of order dated 8.8.2014 passed by this Court in the instant proceedings suggests that interim application, i.e., Cr.MP No.694 of 2014 filed by the respondent was dismissed by this Court and as a result of which, interim order passed by the learned court below came to be executed. Shri Mahesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly stated before this Court that during the pendency of the present petition, accommodation as directed by the learned Trial Court has been made available to the respondent.
4. At this stage, learned counsel representing the parties have fairly stated that instead of adjudicating the present case on merits, direction can be issued to the learned court below to ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 18:25:32 :::HCHP -3- decide the main case in time bound manner. Accordingly, in view of the joint request having been made by the learned counsel for .
the parties, this Court taking note of this fact that the matter is pending before the learned JMIC, Court No.1, Shimla, deems it fit to direct the learned Court below to decide the case in hand expeditiously.
5. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to learned court below to conclude expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months. Pending r the trial applications, if any, are also disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge November 6, 2017 (Mamta) ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 18:25:32 :::HCHP