IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.477 OF 2010 BETWEEN: Seelam Krishna Murty S/o. Seelam Pallayya and another …. Petitioners AND State of Andhra Pradesh through the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another …. Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.477 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: Respondents 1 and 2 in DVC No.2 of 2009 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Amalapuram filed this revision petition questioning order dated 18-02-2010 passed in Criminal M.P. No.3970 of 2009 in DVC No.2 of 2009 restoring the case which was previously dismissed for default of prosecution of the same by the complainant/second respondent herein. 2. This Court is of the opinion that this revision case is not maintainable before this Court straightaway by bypassing the appellate Court. Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in short, the Act) provides for remedy of appeal to the Court of Sessions within 30 days from the date on which order made by the Magistrate was served on the aggrieved person or the respondent as the case may be. 3. Section 29 of the Act does not make any distinction between interim order or interlocutory order or intermediate order or final order. It provides for appeal against any and every order passed by the Magistrate. So, remedy of the petitioners herein against the impugned order is before the appellate Court. 4. Hence, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed giving liberty to the petitioners to file appeal against the impugned order before the Sessions Court subject to the law of limitation. However, interim stay granted in this revision by this Court shall continue to operate for two weeks from today. ___________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU, J June 16, 2010. KTL