IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1963 of 2008() ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05/05/2008 IN CMP 1997/2008 IN MC.8/2008 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, THAMARASSERY .................... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS IN MC NO.8/2008 ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. GOPAKUMAR, S/O.UDAYABHANU.K., UNNYASSERIL HOUSE, PANDARATHURUTH, P.O.CHERIYAZHEEKKAL, KARUNAGAPPALLI, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. UDAYABHANU.K., UNNYASSERIL HOUSE, PANDARATHURUTH, P.O.CHERIYAZHEEKKAL, KARUNAGAPPALLI, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. CHANDRIKA, W/O.UDAYABHANU, UNNYASSERIL HOUSE, KARUNAGAPPALLI. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.A.J.VARGHESE RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN MC NO.8/2008 --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SHAINA.P.GOPINATH, AGED 29 YEARS, D/O.P.P.GOPINATHAN, PUTHANPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHUNDANKUZHI P.O., CHAMAL, THAMARASSERY. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR FOR R2 ADV. SRI.SHEJI P.ABRAHAM FOR R1 ADV. SRI.BIJOY.K.ALIAS FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 1963 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of November, 2008 O R D E R The petitioners are the respondents in an application filed by the first respondent herein claiming reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The enquiry has commenced. The petitioners filed CMP 1997 of 2008 calling for production of seven documents which are in the possession of third parties. That petition was taken for consideration and by Annex.12 order the prayer was turned down by the learned Magistrate on the ground that those documents are not necessary for a proper disposal of the case and that waiting for production of those documents would inevitably retard the progress of the proceedings and contribute to delay in the disposal. 2. I have heard both counsel in detail. Annex.11 is the petition filed and Annex.12 is the order passed thereon. I am unable to agree that the seven documents referred to in Crl.M.C.No. 1963 of 2008 2 Annex.A11 are not relevant or are unnecessary for a proper disposal of the petition filed by the first respondent claiming reliefs. The learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the anxiety of the first respondent is only to ensure expeditious disposal. This court may issue appropriate orders regarding production of the documents after ensuring that the main petition i.e. M.C. 8 of 2008, is disposed of by the learned J.F.M.C.-I, Thamarasserry expeditiously. I am in these circumstances satisfied that this Crl.M.C. deserves to be allowed. 3. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. b) The impugned order is set aside. c) CMP 1997 of 2008 shall stand allowed and the learned Magistrate shall take expeditious steps to summon the seven documents referred to in Annex.11 forthwith. d) I may however observe that every endeavour must be taken to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date on which a copy of this order is produced before the learned Magistrate;. Crl.M.C.No. 1963 of 2008 3 4. Hand over copy of the order to the counsel for the first respondent for immediate production before the learned Magistrate. (R. BASANT) Judge tm