Shrimati Chitralekha Kanwar vs Anand Rameshwar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3327 Chatt

                                                                               NAFR
                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                            Criminal Revision No. 641 of 2021

      Shrimati Chitralekha Kanwar, W/o Anand Rameshwar Kanwar, aged about
       28 years, R/o Naya Risda, Bhadrapara, Balco Nagar, Tahsil & District Korba,
       Chhattisgarh
                                                                       ---- Petitioner
                                      Versus
   1. Anand Rameshwar, S/o Nohar Lal Kanwar, aged about 32 years, R/o
      Madwadoda, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
   2. Nohar Lal Kanwar, S/o Late Ram Singh Kanwar, aged about 56 years, R/o
      Madwadoda, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
   3. Shrimati Sumitra Kanwar, W/o Nohar Lal Kanwar, aged about 52 years, R/o
      Madwadoda, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
                                                                   ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Shri Madhunisha Singh, Advocate For Respondents : Smt. Naushina Afrin Ali, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya, J Order on Board 26.11.2021

1. Heard on admission.

2. The present revision petition under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by

the petitioner against the judgment dated 24.08.2021 passed by the

Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Korba, District Korba (C.G.) in Criminal

Appeal Case No. 07/2021, whereby the Appellate Court has dismissed the

appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 29 of Protection of Women

From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the order dated 27.02.2020

passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class in MJC (Criminal) No. 34/2017

rejecting the claim of the petitioner for interim maintenance. By this revision

petition, the petitioner is seeking setting aside of the judgment dated

24.08.2021 passed the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Korba, District

Korba and further granting her interim maintenance.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering

the agreement dated 29.02.2016 between the parties shown by the counsel for the respondents which is notarized document wherein a final settlement

has taken place between the parties and the petitioner has received a sum

of Rs.5,00,000/- from Respondent No.1, the petitioner has mentioned the

said agreement in other proceedings between the parties, the contents of

the agreement dated 29.02.2016 are also mentioned in Para-7 of the

impugned judgment dated 24.08.2021, the matter is fixed for evidence,

trial/proceeding is commenced, further that the petitioner is living separately

from the respondents since the year 2017 till now, this Court finds no

illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment passed by the Court below.

4. Consequently, the revision petition being devoid of substance deserves to

be and is hereby dismissed at admission stage.

Sd/-

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

vatti