Dr. Shariq Aleem vs Shabnam And Another

Ravindra Maithani, J

The challenge in this revision is made to the order dated 19.09.2024, passed in Criminal Appeal No.281 of 2024, Dr. Shariq Aleem vs. Shabnam and others, by the court of Sessions Judge, Dehradun (“the appeal”).

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and perused the record.

The respondent no.1 has filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in the court of Additional Judicial Magistrate/First Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Dehradun, which was registered as Criminal Misc. Case No.74 of 2020, Smt. Shabnam vs. Dr. Shariq Aleem (“the case”). The case was decided on 24.08.2024. The court has directed that the revisionist would pay Rs. 8,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent no.1 and has also directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 2 Lakhs as compensation. This order dated 24.08.2024 was challenged by the revisionist in appeal. The appeal has been admitted, but the court did not pass any order on the stay application. In the impugned order the court observed that without hearing the private respondent it may not be proper to pass any order on the stay application. The revisionist is aggrieved by this part of the order.

Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit that the order on the stay application has not been passed; he would further submit that the matter is coming on 12.12.2024 before the court.

The court below in the appeal has not passed any order on the stay application, but the court observed that it would be appropriate to hear the private respondent before passing any order on the stay application.

Now, learned counsel for the revisionist gives a statement that the matter is coming up for hearing on 12.12.2024. Therefore, this Court does not see any reason to interfere in the impugned order. Accordingly, the revision deserves to be dismissed at the state of admission itself.

The criminal revision is dismissed in limine.