IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4389 of 2010 ---------------------------------- [CMP.NO.3689/10 IN MC.NO.76/2009 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- BISMI SAINUDHEEN, W/O. SHAHUL HAMEED, T.C. NO. 13/705, SHAHINA MANZIL, KUNNUKUZHI, VANCHIYOOR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. P.K.NABEESA BEEVI, D/O. FATHIMA BEEVI, T.C. 6/193 (4), NETHAJI ROAD, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SHAHUL HAMEED, S/O. M.IBRAHIMKUTTY T.C.13/705, SHAHINA MANZIL, KUNNUKUZHI, VANCHIYOOR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-35. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J ........................................... CRL.M.C..NO.4389 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF NOVEMBER,2010 ORDER By Annexure C order, the petitioner was impleaded as an additional respondent by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram in M.C.76 of 2009 on a petition filed by first respondent under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act ( in short, `the Act'). Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure C order. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 2. The argument of learned counsel is that petitioner is not a respondent as defined under clause (r) of Section 2 of the Act and therefore Annexure C order is to be quashed. 3. The question whether petitioner is a respondent as defined under the Act is a matter to be considered by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram. Under Section 29 of the Act, the order is appealable. In such circumstances, it is not for this court to quash Annexure C order as sought for. Petitioner is entitled to CRMC 4389/2010 2 appear before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and to contend that he is not a respondent as defined under the Act and hence proceedings cannot be initiated as against him. With liberty to raise all the contentions raised herein before the learned Magistrate, petition is disposed of. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk