Skip to content


Gursharan Kaur and Others Vs. Navneet Kaur and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Gursharan Kaur and Others

Respondent

Navneet Kaur and Another

Excerpt:


.....not invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 cr.p.c.as the proceedings in hand are under the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, and are not in the nature of criminal proceedings. the question of criminal liability would only come if an order passed under these proceedings is not complied with by the petitioners.no such order has been passed till date. heard. it is admitted fact that no order has been passed by the trial court which would attract penal consequences against the petitioners.disputed questions of facts are involved in the instant case which shall be gone into by the trial court. rights of the parties are yet to be determined. in view of the above, no case for grant of relief sought is made out, at this stage. dismissed. 20.09.2013 (jitendra chauhan) atulsethi judge sethi atul 2013.09.27 16:56 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Judgment:


CRM-M-31394-2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31394-2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 20.09.2013 Gursharan Kaur and others ...Petitioners Versus Navneet Kaur and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Mr.Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the respondents.

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J.

(Oral) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing of complaint No.161/10 dated 26.07.2010 (Annexure P-1).pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Amritsar.

The learned counsel for the petitioneRs.inter alia, contends that there is no subsisting relationship of the petitioners with the complainant.

The petitioners do not come under the definition of domestic relations of the complainant.

The petitioner is claiming shared accommodation in the house of the petitioner, however, Sethi Atul the 2013.09.27 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-31394-2010 -2- deceased husband of the complainant had already sold his share of the house.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent contends that the petitioner could not invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.as the proceedings in hand are under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and are not in the nature of criminal proceedings.

The question of criminal liability would only come if an order passed under these proceedings is not complied with by the petitioneRs.No such order has been passed till date.

Heard.

It is admitted fact that no order has been passed by the trial Court which would attract penal consequences against the petitioneRs.Disputed questions of facts are involved in the instant case which shall be gone into by the trial Court.

Rights of the parties are yet to be determined.

In view of the above, no case for grant of relief sought is made out, at this stage.

Dismissed.

20.09.2013 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Sethi Atul 2013.09.27 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //