In this judgment, Justice B.Siva Sankara Rao has ruled that the 1 year limitation as applicable to DV Cases is only for Cognizance of the case, and thereby affirmed that this aspect has to be brought up before cognizance is taken of the case by the court, not once proceedings have started.
Interesting Point !!!
J.Shyam Babu vs The State Of Telangana on 9 February, 2017
Shades of Knife
Curated, Reproduced from main.sci.gov.in, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in or any other Government websites such as Gazettes and repositories of Government Orders and Commented in accordance with Section 52(1)(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) and any other applicable public disclosure laws/provisions in India and in various other countries.
I neither have control to remove copies of this document(s) that may be available on websites of High Courts or Supreme Court of India or any of the many other sites, law journal or reporters which carry the same judgment in entire form, nor I can remove references/links to this document(s) from the results of Search Engines such as Google.com.
Read more gyan here.
Though, I can remove content from my site, on request for any parties to a case, even though, I am not legally obligated to do so, except for express bar from a Competent Court.
Om Shanthi !!!
Oh, by the way, my competent Legal team delivers time-bound legal reliefs to victims of false family and matrimonial cases at
AnaghaLegalReliefs.in !!! (work-in-progress)
We are on social media too.
Just google for: Anagha Legal Reliefs
2 thoughts on “<span>J.Shyam Babu Vs The State Of Telangana on 9 February, 2017</span>”
Can this judgment be helpful if wife has filed case after more than 1 year of seperation from husband.
Separation from husband is immaterial in a DV case, as there are other ways of DV that can happen, despite being separated, as per definition of DV in PWDV Act.
So, this judgment is not helpful in the above mentioned scenario