IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2066 of 2010() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP 3679/09 IN CRMP. 4059/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI .................... PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS 1. JOMY JOSE, S/O. JOSE V.J., AGED 28 YEARS R/AT VADAKKE THAZHUPIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUMBALANGI.P.O., KOCHI-7. 2. JOSE.V.J., S/O. CHACKO, AGED 55 YEARS, R/AT VDAKKE THAZHUPIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUMBALANGI.P.O., KOCHI-7. 3. MARY @ KOMALAM, W/O. JOSE. V.J. AGED 50 YEARS, R/AT VADAKKE THAZHUPIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUMBALANGI.P.O., KOCHI-7. BY ADV. SRI.TOM JOSE SMT.GEETHA JOB(OZHUKAYIL) RESPONDENT(S): AGGREIVED PERSON AND STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. DEEPA JOSEPH, D/O. P.J.JOSEPH, AGED 27 YEARS, R/AT PANAYKKAL HOUSE, C.C. NO.20/1873 F, KONNAM, KOLLASSERRY ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI-6. 2. STATE R/BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C..No.2066 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11 th day of June, 2010 ORDER Petitioners, who are the counter petitioners in M.P.No.4059 of 2009 in Crl.M.P.No.3679/2009 on the file of the J.F.C.M-II, Kochi, seek to quash Annexure F interim order dated 22.12.09 passed under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 on the allegation that the Magistrate has been approached by the 1st respondent/applicant by raising untrue allegations and preparing concocting Domestic Incident Report and grossly abusing the process of the court. 2. Whatever may the illegalities, if any, affecting Annexure F order passed in a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the remedy of the petitioners is to file an appeal under Section 29 of the said Act. Without resorting to the said remedy this application was filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, which is itself an abuse of the process of the Court. I see no reason to entertain this petition. This Crl.M.C is accordingly dismissed. Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj