IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.101 OF 2009 Mr.Mahesh Tukaram Vengurlekar .....Applicant/Orig. Appellant/Orig.Resp no.1 vs. 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Miss.Pratibha Tukaram Vengurlekar ...Respondent no.2/ Orig.applicant/Comp. ======== Mr.H.S.Anand with Ms.Sarita Donde, adv.for applicant. Mr.S.R.Shinde, APP for State-respondent no.1. Mr.Manoj A. Singh, adv.for respondent no.2. Coram : Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J. Date : 31st July, 2009 PC :- 1. Heard counsels for both sides. 2. This Revision Application is preferred to challenge correctness and legality of the order dated 11th July 2009 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mazgaon, by which the applicant has been restrained from preventing the second respondent to reside in the shared household vide Section 19 of Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act and the order dated 16th February, 2009 passed by the court of Session in the appeal preferred confirming the order. 3. It is seen from the record that the respondent was not residing in the shared household. This fact is conceded to by the learned advocate for the respondent. In that circumstance, the impugned judgments cannot be sustained. In view of the facts of the case, both the advocates request that the matter be remanded to the trial court for fresh hearing in order to serve the interest of justice. Hence, the Revision Application is allowed. The orders dated 11th July, 2008 passed in C.C.No. 66/Misc/2008 by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mazgaon and the order dated 16th February, 2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No.141 of 2008 are set aside. The complaint is remanded for fresh hearing to the Magistrate’s court. The court to hear the matter expeditiously and dispose the same off within a period of three months from today. (Smt.R.P. SondurBaldota,J.)