Madras High Court
S.Gowrishankar vs Deepa on 17 December, 2014
Author: S.Vaidyanathan
Bench: S.Vaidyanathan
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.12.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10812 of 2014 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014 1.S.Gowrishankar 2.S.Sivaprakasam 3.Sowndaram ... Petitioners Vs. Deepa ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to withdraw the above case in C.M.P.No.8622 of 2013 from the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate at Palani and transfer the same to any other competent court at Gopichettipalayam. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Narayanan For Respondents : Ms.D.Geetha for Mr.D.Venkatesh :ORDER
This petition has been filed to withdraw the case in C.M.P.No.8622 of 2013 from the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Palani and transfer the same to any other competent court at Gopichettipalayam.
2. The case of the petitioners is that the first petitioner/husband filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.18 of 2012 before the Sub-Court, Gopichettipalayam and the respondent/wife filed a Domestic Violation case in C.M.P.No.8622 of 2013 against the petitioners. According to the petitioners, the respondent's father is a politically influenced person and he is facing a lot of cases and he is appearing as accused in the very same Court and since the man with money and muscle power having contact with social elements accompanying with his wife to the Court where the domestic violence case is pending, the petitioners are afraid to go there.
3. The counsel for the respondent/wife has stated that the above two cases need not be heard together as the HMOP is posted for argument on 05.01.2015 and the arguments will be heard on that date. Since the domestic violence case is in evidence stage, there is no need to club both the cases. She further stated that the wife has got an infant child and she will not be in a position to travel from Palani to Gobichettipalayam. She further submitted that her father is an independent person and the allegations made against her and her father are not correct. Further she stated that even assuming that her father has got some cases against him, it has nothing to do with her and nothing wrong in the father accompanying her to the Court. The father is accompanying only to safeguard her interest and not otherwise. She further stated that the respondent's father paid money for completing the post graduate degree of the respondent.
4. In reply, the petitioners denied the averments that the first petitioner's father-in-law has paid money for the respondent/wife for doing post graduate degree. Further he submitted that the HMOP is pending before the Sub-Court, Gopichettipayalam and it is posted for further arguments.
5. Heard both sides.
6. Since the trial has already been commenced and the petitioners are not let in any evidence and the matter is posted formally for further evidence of the wife and the counsel for the wife submitted that they have no further evidence and they are going to address on 05.01.2015, I find no reason to transfer the case in C.M.P.No.8622 of 2013 from the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Palani to any other competent court at Gopichettipaylam.
7. At this stage, since the petitioners express threat to their life, this Court has questioned that whether it is possible for them to appear before the any other court other than at Palani as the respondent's father is appearing in some other cases, in which, he is said to have been involved. However, it is made clear that the Domestic Violence Case will not be transferred to Gopichettipalayam as the evidence will have to commence in the Domestic Violence case, whereas in HMOP which is in the stage of argument. The petitioners further stated that the matter may be posted at the Court situated at Dharapuram and the counsel for the wife submitted that the matter may be transferred to either at Oddanchatram or at Dindigul. Since both the parties submitted that the relief sought for by the wife under Sections 18, 19 and 20 of the Domestic Violence Act 2005, in view of the Section 26 of the Domestic Violence Act, the matter may be transferred to the Family Court, Dindigul. Accordingly, the case in C.M.P.No.8622 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Palani is directed to be transferred to the Family Court, Dindigul. On transfer, the Judge, Family Court, Dindigul is directed to complete the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. However, this Court is of the view that since the issue pertains to violation of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, it is not necessary that the Court should insist the appearance of the parties. As per the powers conferred on the Family Court under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, only in the cases pertaining to family dispute arising under the special enactment, the lawyers can assist the court and the parties need not appear. Whereas the issue pertaining to violation of protection of Domestic Violation Act, the lawyers are also entitled to appear on behalf of the parties.
9. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
17.12.2014 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No skn To
1.The Judicial Magistrate at Palani
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.
skn Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10812 of 2014 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014 17.12.2014