IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 718 of 2009() ----------------------------- CMP.864/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHENGANNUR C.M.P.NO.864/09 IN M.C.53/07 OF THE COURT OF THE JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, CHENGANNUR. REVN. PETITIONER(S): CR.PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS:- --------------------- 1. SHIJI, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.SHAMSUDHEEN, SHIJI MANZIL, VETTIYAR PADINJARUMMURI, VETTIYAR VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK. 2. ADABIAMMAL, AGED 58 YEARS, DO. 3. REJI SHOUKATH, AGED 31 YEARS, DO. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH OCURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUNU ANN GEORGE, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O.JOHN C.GEORGE, CHIRATHARA PUTHEN BUNGLAW, ALA THEKKUMMURI, ALA VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY P.P. SRI. PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-2-2009 , THE COURT ON 24/02/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Crl.R.P. No. 718 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 24th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Revision petitioners who are the counter petitioners in C.M.P. No.864/2009 in M.C. No.53/2007 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chengannur challenge the order dated 9-2-2009 passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing their application filed as C.M.P. No.864/2009 for re-opening the evidence. M.C. No.53/2007 was filed by the 2nd respondent herein two years ago under sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. If petitioners did not get adequate opportunity to adduce evidence in spite of the case having been dragged for two years, they can redress their grievance by filing an appeal under section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in case any order prejudicial to the interests of petitioners is passed by the learned Magistrate. They can canvass the correctness of the impugned order in an appeal filed under section 29 of the said Act against any order of moment. With the above reservation, this petition is dismissed. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. mn.