An application u/s 12 of the DV Act was filed by the wife against the husband seeking maintenance and monetary relief. The magistrate directed the husband to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- p.m. as maintenance and Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation to the wife. Being aggrieved, the husband filed an appeal in the sessions court, which upheld the trial court’s order. Hence, a revision application was filed by the husband.
Dismissing the revision, the Manipur High Court held that even though section 28(1) specifically provides that all proceedings u/s 12 of the DV Act shall be governed by the provisions of CrPC, it is directory in nature and any departure from the provisions of CrPC will not vitiate proceeding initiated under section 12 of the DV Act.
Therefore, the court held that the courts while dealing with proceedings u/s 12 of the DV Act shall abide by the provisions of CrPC as far as possible. However, any departure from the provisions of CrPC will not have the effect of vitiating the proceeding in view of the fact that the statute itself specifically provides for the court to lay down its own procedure for disposal of an application u/s 12. The High Court commented that it was not able to discern any material irregularity or illegality in the proceedings before the court below.