IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1174/2019 BETWEEN:
SMT. KAVITHA PAVAN TIBILE W/O PAVAN H. TIBILE 30 YEARS, R/AT P.V. MUNIDEV RAO H.NO.200, 10TH MAIN BANASHANKARI II STAGE BENGALURU - 70.
(BY SRI. JAYANNA G.R., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI. PAVAN. H. TIBILE S/O HANUMANTHA RAO TIBILE 36 YEARS.
2. SMT. TARAMATI W/O HANUMANTHA RAO TIBILE 60 YEARS.
3. SRI. HANUMANTHA RAO TIBILE 65 YEARS.
ALL ARE R/AT PLOT NO.10, SWAMY VIVEKANANDA NAGARA OPP. POLICE STATION HUKKERI, BELAGAM DIST – 591 309.
... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS ARE DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED: 05.04.2019) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER ON I.A.NO.II DATED:05.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BEGNALURU IN CRL.A.NO.2613/2018.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R As no order adverse to respondents is passed in this petition, notice to respondents is dispensed with.
2. Petitioner herein filed a petition in Crl.Misc.No.4/2016 under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (‘Act’ for short) seeking various reliefs.
3. Learned trial Judge after adjudication, by order dated 05.10.2018 allowed the petition in part and has directed the first respondent herein to pay petitioner herein a sum of Rs.1 lakh towards compensation within three months; to return the F.D. amount of Rs.7,40,000/- and cash of Rs.45,000/- together with Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses. Being aggrieved by the same, respondents herein filed Crl.A.No.2613/2018 under Section 29 of the Act before the jurisdictional Sessions Court. There was delay of 10 days in filing the appeal and I.A.No.1/2018 has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone said delay. Subsequently, matter has been listed before appellate Court on various dates and before disposal of I.A.No.1/2018 and probably because of urgency expressed by the appellants, by way of interim arrangement, orders on I.A.No.2 has been passed on 05.02.2019 by the learned appellate Judge staying judgment and order of sentence dated 05.10.2018 (signed on 05.11.2018) passed by trial Court in Crl.Misc.No.4/2016 subject to petitioner depositing Rs.25,000/- before trial Court. It is this order which is under challenge in this petition.
4. It is no doubt true that Sri Jayanna, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner is correct and justified in contending that appeal filed by respondents is no appeal in the eye of law since said appeal was filed belatedly and without condoning the delay, matter could not be taken up for hearing on the appeal. In fact, that stage has not occurred and it is only by way of interim arrangement, judgment and order passed by trial Court in Crl.Misc.4/2016 has been stayed conditionally by issuing notice. Keeping this petition pending, would definitely result in appeal before appellate Court being stagnated without any further and substantial progress, which would not be in the interest of both the parties. As such, this Court is of the considered view that if a direction is issued to the appellate Court to dispose of I.A.No.1/2018 filed by respondents herein under Section 5 of the Limitation Act expeditiously, within time frame i.e., within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, it would meet ends of justice.
5. At this juncture, Sri Jayanna, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner submits that till I.A.No.1/2018 is disposed of by the appellate Court, he would not precipitate the matter before trial Court by executing the order which has been challenged before lower appellate Court. His submission and undertaking is placed on record.
6. In that view of the matter, till disposal of I.A.No.1/2018, order under challenge before this Court shall stand stayed and shall revive in the event of I.A.No.1/2018 filed for condonation of delay being allowed. Petitioner would be at liberty to seek for modification of the order under challenge in this petition before the appellate Court itself by filing appropriate application.
Subject to observations made herein above, this petition stands disposed of.
In view of disposal of this petition, I.A.No.1/2019 for stay does not survive for consideration and accordingly, it stands rejected.
SD/-
JUDGE *sp