2025:UHC:3963 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1036/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. Mr. R.B. Kala, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Mr. K.S. Bora, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioners have sought quashing of order dated 08.01.2025 passed by learned District & Sessions Judge, Rudraprayag in Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2025. By the said order, learned Sessions Judge entertained an appeal against an order passed under Section 31 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 4. Petitioners have challenged the order passed by learned Sessions Judge on the ground that Sessions Judge cannot hear an appeal against the order passed under Section 31 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Section 29 of the aforesaid Act provides for appeal, which is extracted below:- “29. Appeal—There shall lie an appeal to the Court of Session within thirty days from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate is served on the aggrieved person or the respondent, as the case may be, whichever is later.” 5. Perusal of Section 29 of the said Act reveals that any order, passed by a Magistrate in exercise of power under the aforesaid Act, is appealable before the Court of Session. 2025:UHC:3963 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to Section 28 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act for contending that provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure are made applicable to proceedings under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, therefore, the forum for appeal, provided in Code of Criminal Procedure against acquittal order, has to be availed, and the forum, provided under Section 29 of the aforesaid Act, cannot be approached. 7. The said contention is devoid of merit. Remedy of appeal is creature of Statute. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is a special law, which provide a forum for appeal against any order passed under the Act, therefore, the impugned order, whereby learned Sessions Judge has entertained the appeal filed by respondent, cannot be faulted. The right to appeal against an order passed by Magistrate under Section 29 of the aforesaid Act is unqualified. The order, against which appeal is filed, was passed by Judicial Magistrate, Rudraprayag, thus, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the matter. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J) 15.05.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F4610C1FE58A58531726F BB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.05.19 12:28:39 -07'00' 2025:UHC:3963