Arvind Roy @ Arvind Kumar Roy v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.5637 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3319 Year- 2015 Thana -SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSARAN =========================================================== Arvind Roy @ Arvind Kumar Roy, son of Prithavi Roy, resident of villageDandarpur, P.S. - Janta Bazar, District- Saran at Chapra. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Punam Devi @ Punita Devi, daughter of Late Chandar Shekhar Prasad, wife of Arvind Roy, resident of village- Dandarpur, P.S.- Janta Bazar, District- Saran at Chapra. At present Address- Punita Devi, daughter of Late Chandra Shekhar Prasad, resident of village- Sripur, P.S.- Sahazitpur, District- Saran at Chapra. .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 14-08-2018 The sole defect as pointed out by the Registry is ignored.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
3. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 10.07.2017 passed in Domestic Violence Case No.56 of 2017 arising out of Mahila Helpline Saran C.3319 of 2015 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chapra, Saran whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of rupees two thousand five hundred as interim expenses per
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5637 of 2018 dt.14-08-2018 2/2 month to opposite party no.2.
4. Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 provides that an appeal from the order made by the Magistrate shall lie to the Court of Session within thirty days from the date of service of the order on the aggrieved person or the respondent whichever is later. Instead of filing a statutory appeal, the petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court.
5. This application in its present form is not maintainable. It is dismissed, accordingly.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 19.08.2018 Transmission Date 19.08.2018