BIJAY KUMAR THATOI Vs. BIJAYA BAIJAYANTI THATOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a family dispute. Parties had entered into a compromise and therefore, in terms of the said compromise, we have disposed of the matter vide our order dated 29.11.1994. In the said order we have noted that in view of the amicable settlement of the matter, criminal proceedings pending in the Court by any of the parties stand quashed.

(2.) Today, learned counsel for the appellant appeared before us to argue this Misc. Case, wherein it is averred that along with the aforesaid order, when an application was filed before the JMFC, Aul in GR Case No. 3 of 2012, the learned Magistrate returned the application on the pretext that there was no specific order regarding the proceeding in GR Case No. 3 of 2012.

(3.) In our opinion, the JMFC is too young an officer to be reprimanded. We advise her to be more careful as a judicial officer. She is not a technocrat, nor is she a person, who is required to decide things with arithmetic pragmatism. The order passed by this Court has to be given respect. Once we have observed that all criminal proceedings stand quashed, the JMFC is expected to understand the implication of the same and should not compel this Court to take administrative action against her. We advise her to be careful in dealing with judicial matters, especially disputes between family members, which are basically in the nature of family feud.