1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :08.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN Crl.R.C.(MD) No.10 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 Meeran Mehaboob . . . Revision Petitioner/Respondent Vs. Safana . . . Respondent/Petitioner Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C praying to call for the records in Cr.M.P.No.7532 of 2010, dated 03.12.2010 in M.C.No.13 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sathankulam and to set aside the same. For petitioner : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar For respondent : Mr.J.Ashok O R D E R Heard the submission made by Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.Ashok, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The present revision case is filed challenging the exparte order dated 03.12.2010, made in Cr.M.P.No.7532 of 2010, praying for the reliefs under Sections 19, 19(8) and 20(8) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that challenging the virus of the said order an appeal has been preferred in C.A.No.92 of 2010 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi and the same is pending adjudication. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instruction would submit that no application for stay was filed praying for the stay of operation of the order, which is the subject matter of revision. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is having excellent case on merits and hence, the revision petition may be ordered. 5. On the said submissions, this Court heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 6. The point urged by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner can be adjudicated in the said appeal. If the petitioner is under the apprehension that the exparte order is likely to be executed, it is always open for the petitioner to pray for stay of operation of the said order. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the revision cannot be entertained. 7. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of and the petitioner is at liberty to file a petition for stay before the lower appellate Court within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the lower appellate Court on filing of such an application, entertain the same, if it is in order and pass orders in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi. 2.The Judicial Magistrate, Sathankulam. +1cc to Mr.P.Jeyapal Associates, Advocate, Sr.No. 5515 sj ssk/14.03.2011 /4c -2p/- Crl.R.C.(MD) No.10 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/