IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2010 / 1ST MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1727 of 2009() ------------------------------------ MC.22/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS NO.3 & 4 -------------------------------------------------------- 1. VIJAYA,W/O.U.SHANMUGHA SUNDARAM NO.202, 16TH CROSS, CLRI NAGAR, NEELANGARAI CHENNAI- 600 041. 2. U. SHANMUGHA SUNDRAM, S/O.UTHAMALINGAM, DO..DO... BY ADV. MR.SAJAN VARGHEESE K., MR.LIJU. M.P. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/NON-PARTY: ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. PUSHPALATHA APPUKUTTAN D/O.APPUKUTTAN, (FORMERLY W/O.DR.KANDASWAMY RAJENDRAN CHETTY) MELEKKADU HOUSE, CHORAKODU, PERUVEMBA PO, CHITTUR TALUK PALAKKAD DIST. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM R1 BY ADV. MR.BINOY VASUDEVAN. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.1727 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 21st January 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are respondents 3 and 4 in M.C.22/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Palakkad. Said proceedings was initiated by the first respondent by filing an application under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in M.C.22/2009 contending that third respondent is not a respondent as defined under the Act and the alleged domestic violence was prior to the coming into force of the Act and therefore, proceedings is to be quashed. Crmc 1727/09 2 2. This court in Vijayalalekshmi Amma v. Bindu (2010 (1) KLT 79) considered the question whether a proceedings pending before the Magistrate under Section 12 of the Act is to be quashed on the ground that the respondent shown therein is not a respondent, or house is not a shared house or applicant is not aggrieved person as defined under the Act and held that it is for the concerned Magistrate to decide the question and not for this court to exercise the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. In view of the decision petitioners are at liberty to raise all the contentions before the Magistrate and seek appropriate order in accordance with law. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.