Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/180/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 180 of 2008
==========================================
HANSABEN
MAHENDRABHAI SHAH
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & ANR
==========================================
Appearance
:
MR SL VAISHYA for
Applicant:1
MR KP RAVAL, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent:1
None for
Respondent:2
==========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI
Date
: 25/06/2008
ORAL ORDER
Heard
Mr.S.L.Vaishya, learned Advocate for the petitioner.
By
this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the implementation and
execution of the order dated 19th September, 2001 passed
by the learned Judge, Family Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal
Miscellaneous Application No.1036 of 2001 be stayed.
A
perusal of the record of the case shows that the petitioner had made
an application under Section 125(3) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, (‘the Code’), for recovery of the amount of
maintenance awarded in her favour for the period between 26th
May, 2000 to 25th April, 2001. By an order dated 19th
September, 2001, the learned Judge of the Family Court, Ahmedabad
has recorded that the petitioner has made an endorsement below the
application Exhibit 1, wherein she has stated that as per their
customs, a divorce has taken place between the petitioner and the
opponent and that there are no further disputes in respect of the
said application, hence, the petitioner does not desire to prosecute
the application any further. In the circumstances, the learned Judge
of the Family Court had disposed of the proceedings accordingly.
Considering
the fact that the order dated 19th September, 2001 is an
invited order, there is no question of staying the same. Besides,
the learned Advocate for the petitioner is not able to point out any
infirmity in the said order dated 19th September, 2001
passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Ahmedabad. In the
circumstances, no case is made out for grant of the reliefs claimed
in the petition.
For
the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any merit in the
petition. The petition is, accordingly dismissed, in limine.
(HARSHA
DEVANI, J.)
Amit/-
Top