[203] Kuldeep Ch Tanuja and Coram : Present: PANKAJ J [1] 227 of th petitioners Protection Order dated [2] petition und under:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT CHANDIGA CR-5032- Date of De eep Chauhan and others versus ja and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PA Mr. Sahil Gupta, Advocate for Mr. S.P. Chahar, Advocate for **** KAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) The present revision petition of the Constitution of India, imp ioners in a complaint filed under Se ction of Women from Domestic Vio r dated 17.08.2019. The petitioners earlier appro ion under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The sam “xxx xxx [3] The present petition is d with liberty to the petitioner to in terms of order dated 30.11 Singal, CRM-M-58023-2023; Saini vs. Pooja Saini and oth Bench, and order dated 24.04.2 others vs. State of Punjab and o by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this xxx xxx T OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH -2024 (O&M) of Decision : 06.04.2026 …Petitioners ….Respondents PANKAJ JAIN ate for the petitioners. (Through V.C. for respondent No.1. tition has been preferred under Artic , impugning the summoning of th der Sections 12(1), 18, 20 & 22 of th tic Violence Act, 2005 as well as th approached this Court by way of he same was disposed off, observing a xxx is disposed of being not maintainab r to seek alternative remedy as per la 0.11.2023 in Gautam Singal vs. An the order dated 18.05.2024 in Varu others, CRR-220-2024 passed by th 04.2023 in Jaspal Kaur alias Pinki an and others, CRM-M-19553-2023 passe f this Court. xxx” V.C.) Article of the 2 of the l as the ay of a rving as inable r law, Anju Varun y this ki and passed RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.04.10 17:34 I agree to specified portions of this document CR-5032-2024 (O&M) -2- [3] The order passed by Single Bench in ‘Jaspal Kaur alias Pinki and others (supra) was referred for consideration before a Larger Bench. The Division Bench in ‘Hemant Bhagat and others versus Prekshi Sood Bhagat’, Civil Revision No.3407 of 2024 vide Order dated 25.10.2024 held that Jaspal Kaur alias Pinki and others (supra) does not lay down the correct position of law. [4] An aggrieved person is well within his/her right to approach this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for redressal of his grievances emanating from the complaint filed under the Domestic Violence Act, observing as under:- “32. As a sequel of discussions held hereinabove, the questions referred by the Single Bench are answered as under:- i) Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. is applicable qua proceedings arising out of complaint under Section 12 of the Act of 2005. The only exception is the cases where provisions of the Act of 2005 have been invoked in proceedings pending before Civil Court or Family Court. ii) In view of answer to question No.(i), there is no need to answer question No.(ii). iii) The power of High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are subject to self-restraint. The same can neither be curtailed by statute nor by judicial order. In terms of dictum of law laid down by Supreme Court in the case of L. Chandra Kumar’s case (supra) and Surya Dev Rai’s case (supra), Article 227 is part of basic structure of the Constitution of India and is even beyond Constitutional amendment.” [5] In view thereof, this Court finds that the present revision petition needs to be disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to seek revival of the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. i.e. CRM-M-42895- 2019. RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.04.10 17:34 I agree to specified portions of this document CR-5032-2024 (O&M) -3- [6] Disposed off accordingly. [7] The petitioner are granted two weeks’ time to move an appropriate application seeking revival of the petition. [8] All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed off. (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE 06.04.2026 ‘R. Sharma' Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.04.10 17:34 I agree to specified portions of this document