VISHAL JINDAL Vs. PUJA JINDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) QUESTIONING the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment dated 04/12/2012 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 28/2012, the applicants herein have filed this criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called as 'Cr.P.C.'), by which, their appeal filed under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter called as 'Act of 2005') has been dismissed. The core facts required for judging the correctness of the impugned judgment are as under: -

(2.) MR . P.K. Verma, learned senior counsel with Mr. Sunil Sahu, appearing for the applicants would submit that the learned Sessions Judge went wrong in holding that the appeal under Section 29 of the Act of 2005 is not maintainable against the impugned order and thereby committed a manifest legal error of law in dismissing the appeal, as such, the appeal under Section 29 of the Act of 2005 was clearly maintainable as the order directing personal attendance has affected their rights substantially.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considered the rival submissions made therein.