LALIT Vs. VANDANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Dr. Jamal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Satpute, learned counsel for the respondents. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith by consent of learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner feels aggrieved by the order passed by the Family Court, Nagpur, in Petition No. E -11/2008 rejecting the application of the petitioner for amendment of his reply in a proceeding under Section of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) THE apprehension of the petitioner, in my opinion, is ill -founded inasmuch as the proceedings under Section of the Code of Criminal Procedure are of quasi civil nature. In such a proceeding, it is not necessary to adhere strictly to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure. As such, the evidence in respect of the facts which cover further developments can be led without there being any pleading in that regard. Needless to state, the probative value of such evidence will have to be decided by the trial Court. However, the petitioner cannot be precluded from leading evidence only because there was no pleading in that regard. It may be further noted that the application under action 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure is to be decided summarily for the purpose of speedy disposal on the ground of convenience and social order. The present petition, therefore, can be disposed of with a direction to the Family Court to abide by the observations made by this Court hereinabove. The petition accordingly stands disposed of.