← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./78004/2019disposed

Nagendra Dubey v. The State Of Bihar

2019-12-20Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78004 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-813 Year-2018 Thana- DOMESTIC VIOLENACE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.

Nagendra Dubey Son of Late Chhathu Dubey, Resident of Village - Saidpur Ganesh, P.O. - Panapur, P.S. - Bidupur, District - Vaishali. 2.

Manorma Devi Wife of Nagendra Dubey, Resident of Village - Saidpur Ganesh, P.O. - Panapur, P.S. - Bidupur, District - Vaishali. 3.

Jainendra Kumar Son of Nagendra Dubey, Resident of Village - Saidpur Ganesh, P.O. - Panapur, P.S. - Bidupur, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Prerna Kumari Wife of Jainendra Kumar Daughter of Diwakar Trivedi, at present residing at Village - Sutanpur, P.O. - Kanhaipur, P.S. - Mokama, District - Patna ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 20-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioners in the present case are seeking quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 10.05.2019 passed by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barh in D.V. Case No. 813 (C) of 2018.

No case for quashing of the entire proceeding of the D.V. Act is made out on the face of the complaint which is enclosed as Annexure '1' to the present application.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78004 of 2019(3) dt.20-12-2019 2/2 The petitioner in case feels aggrieved by order dated 10.05.2019 passed by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barh by which the learned Magistrate has ordered to pay Rs. 4000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 as maintenance, may prefer the statutory appeal provided under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. If such an appeal is preferred within a period of 30 days from today, the same will be considered by the appellate authority on its own merit.

This application stands disposed off accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/ved U T