Crl. Revision No.1527 of 2010(O&M) # 1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Revision No.1527 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision:-15.11.2010 Smt. Veena Devi. ......Petitioner. Versus Subash Chander. ......Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. S.K. Garg Narwana, Advocate for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent. *** JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Present revision petition under Article 401 of Constitution of India was filed by the mother of two minor children assailing the order dated 02.04.2010(Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind in Criminal Appeal No.90 of 4.9.2009 titled as Subash Chander Vs. Smt. Veena Devi under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act whereby the respondent-grand father was directed to take the minor children from the custody of the petitioner-mother on 3.4.2010 after school hours and to hand over the same back to the petitioner on 4th of April, 2010 prior to 6.00 PM. This court while issuing notice of motion had directed the Crl. Revision No.1527 of 2010(O&M) # 2# learned Appellate Court to dispose of the appeal on 5th of June, 2010 that was the next date fixed before that Appellate Court. At the time of arguments today learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent-grandfather has withdrawn his appeal pending before the learned Appellate Court and, therefore, the present revision petition has become infructuous as all the interim orders have also gone with the appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that against the interim order dated 2.4.2010 whereby the petitioner was directed to hand over the custody of the minor children to the grandfather for the week end, the present revision petition had been filed on the same day on the ground that the handing over even for the weekend was not in the interests of the children due to the criminal antecedents of the family of her deceased- husband. He thus submits that the non compliance if any of the interim order dated 2.4.2010 was bonafide and not willful by any stretch of reasoning and, therefore, would not render the petitioner liable for any contempt proceedings. He still further submits that the main petition case no.120 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 has also been decided in favour of the petitioner-wife whereby the custody of the minor children has been ordered to remain with the petitioners and no visitation rights to the grandfather have been granted. None has appeared on behalf of the respondents to refute the submissions. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner I am inclined to agree that in the circumstances of the case the petitioner prima facie cannot be held to have violated the interim order dated 2.4.2010 and further that the Crl. Revision No.1527 of 2010(O&M) # 3# present revision petition has become infructuous. Disposed of as infructuous ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 15th November, 2010 Vinay