IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2010 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4743 of 2010() ----------------------- MC.76/2009 of ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM ................. PETITIONER / PETITIONER : --------------------------------------- SHAHUL HAMEED I., S/O.LATE M. IBRAHIM KUTTY, AGED 35 YEARS, R/AT TC 13/705, MRA-183, VANCHIYOOR PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-35. BY ADVS. SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR SRI.G.SURARSHAN RESPONDENT / RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. P.K.NABEESA BEEVI, W/O. LATE M. IBRAHIM KUTTY, R/AT TC 6/193(4), NETHAJI ROAD, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4743 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 3rd December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the respondent in M.C.76/2009 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-V order and also to issue a direction to the Magistrate for a just and fair proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. By filing C.M.P.3628/2010 petitioner sought to implead the other children of the respondent as additional respondents. Petition is seen filed under Section 319(1) of Code of Criminal Crmc 4743/10 2 Procedure. By Annexure-V order learned Magistrate dismissed the petition. 4. Though learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that learned Magistrate should have impleaded the other children also as parties to Crl.M.C, I do not find that as against wishes of the first respondent who filed petition under Section 2 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act before the learned Magistrate the other children are to be impleaded. It may be that if without the presence of all her children, first respondent is not entitled to the relief sought for, it is at her risk. There is no illegality or irregularity in Annexure-V order. Learned counsel then submitted that learned Magistrate is not permitting the petitioner to examine the witnesses and petition filed to issue summons is not being Crmc 4743/10 3 disposed. If any petition is pending, learned Magistrate shall dispose the same expeditiously. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.