Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hafiz Mohammad Siddique vs Smt. Rana Parveen @ Taajwar on 11 July, 2018
1 CRR-1543-2014
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRR-1543-2014
(HAFIZ MOHAMMAD SIDDIQUE Vs SMT. RANA PARVEEN @ TAAJWAR)
16
Jabalpur, Dated : 11-07-2018
Mohd. Adil Usmani, learned counsel for the applicant.
Ms. Snehlata Dixit, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
Heard on IA No.8039/2018 is an application for transposition of respondent No.2 and 3 as petitioners.
This petition has been filed under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgement dated 21.5.2014 delivered in Cr.A.No.344/2013, by which the first appellate Court has affirmed the order of the trial Court passed in MJC No.126/2009 dated 15.3.2013 by which respondents No.2 Mohd. Majid and respondent No.3 Salman have been directed not to make domestic violence against the respondent No.1 Smt. Rana Parveen @ Taajwar and also given a direction to allow respondent No.1 Smt. Rana Parveen from living comfortably in her husband's house and do not dispossess her, under the provisions of Domestic Violence of Women Protection Act, 2005.
It seems from the face of the record that the above said directions were also given to the brother-in-laws Mohd. Majid and Salman of respondent No.1 Smt. Rana Parveen . The petitioner Hafiz Mohd. Siddiqui is reported dead and his name ought to be deleted from the present petition. In the main case under the Act, son Mohd. Majid and son-in-law Salman of Hafiz Mohd. Siddiqui have been arrayed as respondents No. 2 and 3. Perhaps by mistake in present petition they are arrayed as respondents. The direction in the order of JMFC, Bhopal dated 15.3.2013 is confirmed in the judgment delivered in Criminal Appeal by ASJ, Bhopal, dated 21.5.2014 are equally against Mohd. Majid and Salman. So they have the right to defend themselves. After death of petitioner, respondent No.2 Mohd. Majid and respondent No.3 Salman are the persons who are aggrieved by the impugned judgment challenged in this revision.
In view of the aforesaid, it will be in the interest of justice to allow the transposition of their names in place petitioner Hafiz Mohd. Siddique. Accordingly IA No.8039/2018, an application for transposition is allowed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead the name of Mohd. Majid and Salman who are respondent No. 2 and 3, as petitioners.
Necessary amendment be carried out within 7 working days. Parties are also heard on IA No.13814/17 which is presented by respondent No.1 praying to dismiss the present criminal revision stating that the main 2 CRR-1543-2014 petitioner Hafiz Mohd. Siddiqui has died and the criminal revision presented on his behalf has now abated.
IA No.8039/2018 filed on behalf of the respondent No. 2 Mohd. Majid and respondent No.3 Salman has been accepted, which is an application for transposition of their names in place of the petitioner. Hence, IA No.13814/17 has become infructuous and it is accordingly dismissed.
(MOHD. FAHIM ANWAR) Digitally signed by SANTOSH MASSEY JUDGE Date: 2018.07.12 00:10:53 -07'00' SKM