Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25199 of 2018 Applicant :- Kailash And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Mani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ganesh Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 10.05.2018 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate-II, Kanpur Nagar, in Case No. 2136 of 2014 (Smt. Ramvati and others Vs. Kailash and others), under section 23 of Domestic Violence Act, P.S. Chakeri District Kanpur Nagar.
From the record, it appears that the opposite party No. 2 filed a complaint case No. 2136 of 2014 (Smt. Ramvati and others Vs. Kailash and others) under section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, P.S. Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar. In the aforesaid case, the opposite party No. 2 filed an application under section 23 of the aforesaid Act, which came to be allowed by the Magistrate, vide order dated 03.02.2016. The order dated 03.02.2016 was carried in appeal by the applicant, which was dismissed, vide order dat3d 20.7.2014. The aforesaid orders came to be challenged by the applicant before this Court by means of criminal revision No. 2824 of 2017, Kailash and another Vs. State of U.P. and another), which was also dismissed, vide order dated 12.2.2017.
The Magistrate by means of the order dated 8.5.2017 has directed that the record of the case be transferred to the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate-II, Kanpur Nagar and vide order dated 10.5.2018, recovery warrants have been issued against the applicants for recovery of the amount payable in terms of the order dated 3.2.2016. Order pursuant to which recovery proceedings have been initiated has attained finality. There is no illegality in ensuring the compliance of the order dated 3.2.2016. By virtue of the provisions contained in Rule 6 of the Prevention of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Rules, 2005, the recovery of the amount cannot be said to be illegal.
In view of the facts and reasons as noted herein above, no occasion arises before this Court to interfere with the present application.
The present application fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.7.2018 HSM