DHALE RAM Vs. PUSHPA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment dated 16.5.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, HP in Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2016, affirming order dated 24.9.2015 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in Petition No. 30-I of 2014, under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter, 'Act') , whereby application filed by respondent No. 1 under Section 12 of the Act was allowed and protection, residence and maintenance orders came to be passed in favour of respondent No. 1, petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.

(2.) For having bird's eye view, necessary facts shorn of unnecessary details are that marriage between petitioner and respondent No. 1 was solemnized in the year 2011 and one child was born out of their wedlock. Allegedly the petitioner started abusing and beating respondent No. 1 at the instance of his parents, who were insisting upon him to give divorce to respondent No. 1 and marry some other girl. It is also alleged that petitioner compelled respondent No. 1 to leave her matrimonial home. Subsequently, respondent filed an application/complaint under Section 12 of the Act averring therein that she wanted to live with her husband but since she apprehends danger to her life, protection, residence and maintenance orders may be passed in her favour. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, taking note of the material adduced on record by the respective parties, allowed the application filed by respondent No. 1 and prohibited petitioner and respondent No. 2 from committing any act of domestic violence and directed petitioner to provide accommodation to respondent No. 1, consisting of one room with kitchen, bath room and toilet. Learned trial Court also reserved liberty to respondent No. 1 to hire alternative accommodation in the event of failure on the part of petitioner to provide accommodation, rent and electricity bills whereof were to be paid by the petitioner. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate further directed the petitioner to give monthly maintenance of Rs. 2,000/- to respondent No. 1 and Rs. 1,000/- to her minor child.

(3.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, petitioner preferred a criminal appeal under Section 29 of the Act before Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh. However, the fact remains that the said appeal was dismissed, as a result of which order dated 24.9.2015 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition praying therein to set aside impugned judgment passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu and order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate.