IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4274 of 2008() ------------------------- MC.5/1999 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER -------------------------------------------- MUHAMMED RAFI, S/O.SULAIMAN, THATHA HOUSE, MANNUVATHARAM P.O.PUDUNAGARAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PETITIONER ----------------------------------------------- 1. SAHIRA BANU, D/O.MUHAMMED ALI, 5/51, MA MANZIL, PAZHAYAKOTTA STREET, PALAKKAD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4274 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November 2008 O R D E R The petitioner has suffered an order directing payment of amounts under Section 3 of the Muslim Women's (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act. The order directs payment of maintenance along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. That order was not challenged. But the amounts due were not paid in time. The claimant initiated proceedings for recovery. In bits and pieces, the amounts were paid. But the interest due was not paid. The claimant has filed an application for recovery of the interest due. At this stage, wisdom appears to have daunted the petitioner and the petitioner wants to challenge Annexure A order. The challenge cannot be entertained now. Impugned order Annexure A was passed in proceedings initiated in 1999. The order bears the date 07/01/2002. After elapse of more than six years, the petitioner who has not chosen to challenge the order by initiating appropriate proceedings in revision, now wants this court to invoke its extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to interfere with the direction to pay interest in Annexure A order. Crl.M.C.No.4274/08 2 2. Conscious of the nature, quality, scope and contours of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction available to this court under Section 482 Cr.P.C, I am of the opinion that such jurisdiction need not be invoked to entertain a challenge against the order which is hopelessly barred by limitation. The order passed which essentially caters to the interest of prompt compliance with the order, does not also warrant invocation of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction in the interests of justice. In any view of the matter, the challenge cannot be entertained. 3. The challenge fails. This petition is dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.4274/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.4274/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008