SHOWKAT HUSSAIN Vs. NAZIA JEELANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court vested in terms of Section 561-A Cr.P.C for setting aside the order dated 27th July, 2019 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Srinagar ("the Appellate Court" for short) in case No.03/App/II as also the order passed by Sub Judge Special Mobile Magistrate (under 13th Finance Commission), Srinagar (hereafter for short "the trial court'), passed in file No.82/A dated 12th March 2018. Few facts which are relevant for the disposal of this petition may be noticed first.

(2.) The respondents filed an application in terms of Section 12 of the Jammu and Kashmir Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2010 (hereafter for short "the DVA"), which was contested by the petitioners by filing their objections. Apart from and in addition to meeting the contents of the application, the petitioners also took an objection with regard to the maintainability of the application. The parties led their evidence in support of their respective cases. The trial court after considering all the issues involved, allowed the application and granted the reliefs in favour of the petitioners therein, which are detailed in para 61 to 67 of order dated 12th March, 2018. The appeal preferred by the petitioners herein before the Appellate Court came to be dismissed on 27th July, 2019. The order of the trial court was, thus, upheld. The petitioners are, thus, aggrieved and assail the order impugned, primarily, on the following grounds:-

(3.) The petition is vehemently resisted by the respondents. It is submitted that this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction vested in terms of 561-A Cr.P.C may not re-appreciate the evidence to come to a finding of the fact which is different from the concurrent findings recorded by the two courts below. It is urged that the trial court as also the Appellate Court, after appreciating the evidence in its true perspective, have rightly concluded that the plea of the divorce put forth by the petitioners, has not been proved and that the form of divorce i.e Triple Talaq is null and void and, therefore, does not result in dissolution of marriage and severing the relationship of husband and wife between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.1. This finding of fact recorded by the trial court and affirmed by the Appellate Court is based on proper appreciation of respondents' evidence on record and, therefore, no interference therewith is called for. The respondents have also disputed the proposition of law propounded by the learned counsel for the petitioners that a divorced wife is not "an aggrieved person" and, therefore, no petition/complaint under Section 12 of the DVA on behalf of divorced wife is maintainable.