MEENAKSHI Vs. PRAVEEN RAJORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was married to the first respondent on 31.10.2009. From out of their cohabitation, a child took birth on 30.11.2011. It is stated that the petitioner was constrained to leave the matrimonial home with her child on 13.02.2012. The first respondent (husband) sued for divorce sometime in 2013-2014. Subsequent to that event, the petitioner (wife) presented a complaint (CC no.178/6/14) in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate invoking Section 12 read with Sections 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, Domestic Violence Act) seeking various reliefs.

(2.) The respondent (husband), who had been called by the process issued on the said complaint moved an application seeking its dismissal primarily on the ground that it was barred by limitation. The Metropolitan Magistrate dismissed the said application by her order dated 108.2015 observing that the issue of limitation required inquiry and evidence to be called for.

(3.) The above-said order was challenged by the respondent by appeal (Crl. A. no.35/15 new no.54855/16) in the court of the Sessions. The first appellate court, by its judgment dated 30.09.2016, upheld the contention of the respondent and held that the petition under Domestic Violence Act was barred by limitation referring in this context to Section 468 Cr. PC. The said order has been challenged by the petitioner / wife before this court invoking the inherent power and jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr. PC.