NIHAR RANJAN PARIDA Vs. SOOCHNA DHAL & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Perused the records. The petitioner, who is the husband and father of the aggrieved persons who have been arrayed as opposite party nos.1 and 2 in this application, has filed this application under Sec. 482 of the Crimial P.C. challenging the order dated 14.9.2015 passed by learned S.D.J.M., Panposh at Rourkela on a petition filed by him for dismissal of the petition filed by the opposite party nos.1 and 2 as aggrieved party under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for brevity) on the ground that the order suffers from non-application of judicial mind and the learned Judge has not dealt with law governing the field and misread the purpose of such enactment.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner very emphatically submitted that in the petition under Sec. 12 of the Act, aggrieved persons have stated that