IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2010 / 9TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3463 of 2010() ------------------------- MC. NO. 82/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KASARAGOD . . . PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- ABDUL GAFOOR, S/O.SHEIK ADAM, KASALGALLY, HIDEYATH NAGAR, UPPALA, KASARAGOD TALUK & DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SRI.ANEESH JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. SHERA BANU, W/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, R/AT SHERA MANZIL, MANIMUNDA P.O., UPPALA. 2. SHEIK MOHAMED FARHOM, S/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, -DO-, -DO-. 3. MOHAMED FAHIM, S/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, -DO-, -DO-. 4. MOHAMED FAYAZ, S/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, (MINOR) 5. MOHAMED FAZIL, S/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, (MINOR), (RESPONDENTS 4&5 REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN 1ST RESPONDENT). 6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-31. R6 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: (M.N) M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3463 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the respondent in M.C.No.82/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kasaragod, filed by the first respondent under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that Annexure-A5 order is only an abuse of process of the court and it is in violation of Article 21 of Constitution of India. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find that it is for this Court to quash Annexure-A5 order as sought for. Petitioner is at liberty to approach the learned Magistrate and raise all the contentions raised herein. If his grievance is that CRMC 3463/10 2 learned Magistrate would insist for his personal presence, petitioner is at liberty to file an application to dispense with his personal presence. Magistrate not to insist for the presence of the petitioner for considering the plea raised by the petitioner regarding the maintainability of the petition. Petition is disposed. 31st August, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv