NIDHI BANSAL Vs. PUNIT BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing of the instant Criminal Revision Petition under Sec. 397 r.w. Sec. 401 of the Cr.P.C. challenge has been made to the judgment dtd. 22/11/2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujangarh, District Churu in Criminal Appeal No.11/2022 by which the learned Judge has partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondents against the order dtd. 25/4/2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sujangarh, District Churu in Criminal Misc. Case No.218/2021 whereby the application under Sec. 21 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 filed by petitioner was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case as narrated by the petitioner are that she filed an application under Ss. 12, 18, 19, 20 21 & 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (herein after referred to as 'the Act of 2005') and on 16/11/2021 she filed another application under Sec. 21 of the Act of 2005 before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Sujangarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned trial Court') averring therein that from the very beginning of the marriage, she was physically and mentally harassed and humiliated by the respondent and the members of her in-laws family. She and her daughter were ousted out from her marital home and her minor son Gitish Bansal aged 9 years and 6 months at the relevant point of time was forcefully separated from her and she was not allowed to meet him. Thus, she prayed that she may be allowed to meet his son once in a week.

(3.) In reply thereto, the respondents stated that the petitioner filed application under Sec. 21 of the Act of 2005 with an intention to harass and humiliate him and his family members. It was further stated that he has not deserted her wife; she started living with her parents since last four years without any reasons. Further, it was stated in the reply that petitioner-wife used to beat and intimidate her son and, therefore, his son was not happy with her and that's why Master Gitish is living with him and he has been provided all facilities for his study and other welfare. The petitioner filed an application under Sec. 97 of the Cr.P.C. for custody of her minor child and the same was dismissed. On 25/4/2022, the learned trial Court after hearing the rival parties, allowed the petitioner's application filed under Sec. 12 of the Act of 2005 and ordered that she would be entitled to meet her son on 2nd and 4th Sunday of every month between 11:00 am to 04:00 pm but compliance of which was not feasible.