Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In view of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners shall raise all the grounds as raised herein before the trial court at the time of trial. Further, taking into consideration the request as made by the learned…
Judgment
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 02.06.2025CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANIC.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.1471 of 2025andC.M.P.(MD).No.7428 of 20251.E.Jozhi2.Bilal ...PetitionersVs.1.B.Meenatchisanchana @ Shaziya2.Baisal3.Muzeeb Bhasha4.Kamaal Bhasha @ Kamaali5.Sarbudeen ...Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to call for the entire records in DVC.No.118 of 2024 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Madurai and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioners. For Petitioners: Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian * * * * * 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDERThis petition has been filed seeking to quash the case in D.V.C.No.118 of 2024 on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Madurai.2. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against the respondents, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.3. The petitioners herein are respondent Nos.1 and 3 in D.V.C.No.118 of 2024 before the trial Court. The first respondent herein has filed D.V.C.No.118 of 2024 before the Additional Mahila court, Madurai, under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act and BNSS, 20234. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the first petitioner is the mother-in-law and the second petitioner is the brother-in-law of the first respondent. The first respondent has initiated domestic violence proceedings against her husband and her in-laws. He would further submit that the second petitioner is working abroad and that the continuation of the said case would cause them considerable hardship. It is also submitted that the petitioners have no way connected with the allegations made by the first respondent in the DVC case. Therefore, he prays that the petitioners be permitted to raise all the grounds mentioned herein before the trial court. He also requests this Court to dispense with their personal appearance before the trial court. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
#5. In view of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners shall raise all the grounds as raised herein before the trial court at the time of trial. Further, taking into consideration the request as made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, their appearance before the trial court is dispensed with except for their appearance for the purpose of receiving the copy of the proceedings u/s 230 of BNSS, framing of charges, questioning under Section 351 of BNSS and on the day on which judgment is to be pronounced. However, if for any particular reason, the presence of the petitioners is necessary, the trial court, at its wisdom, shall direct their appearance on those days. Further, this Court directs the petitioners to represent the case through the counsel.6. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.02.06.2025 Internet:Yes/NoIndex:Yes/NoTSGToThe Additional Mahila Court, Madurai.3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Copy to:-The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis M.DHANDAPANI , J. TSGC.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.1471 of 202502.06.20255/5
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 230, 351.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.