✦ Kerala High Court · 07 Aug 2009

SUBAIR. K v. ASMA

CRL.MC No. 2523 of 2009M SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR2 min read

Case at a glance

Judgment

BY ADV. MR.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT/STATE: ------------------------------------------------------

1.

ASMA, AGED 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT PAZHAYAKADAPPURAM, KANHANGAD SOUTH P.O., HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

2.

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2523 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 7th August 2009

O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for a direction to Sessions Judge, Kasargod to dispose Annexure-2 Crl.A.1/2009 within a time frame and for a further direction to the Magistrate, Hosdurg to keep in abeyance the enforcement of Annexure-1 order which is challenged in Crl.A.1/2009.

2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard.

3.

When Annexure-1 order was sought to be executed under Section 31 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 petitioner approached this court by filing W.P.C.13606/2009. Under Annexure-4 judgment, this court found that the order cannot be enforced as provided under Section 31 of the Act but is to be executed like an order passed under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, in view of Section 28 of the Act. Question whether Annexure-1 order is to CRMC 2523/09 2 be suspended or not during the pendency of the appeal is to be decided in Crl.A.1/2009 pending before the Sessions court. When an appeal is pending whether the order is to be allowed to be enforced or not is to be decided by the Sessions court. Petitioner had sought as order of stay of execution of that order. Learned Sessions Judge granted an order of stay also but on conditions. Without fulfilling the conditions, petitioner is not entitled to seek an order from this court to keep the order in abeyance till the disposal of Crl.A.1/2009, especially when the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is not challenged. As the grievance of the petitioner is that the appeal is not being disposed, Sessions Judge, Kasargod is directed to dispose the appeal as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of this order. It is made clear that if the petitioner fulfills the conditions imposed by the learned Sessions Judge he is entitled to get an order of stay during the pendency of the appeal. Petition is disposed. uj. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 125, 482; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — s. 31.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Kerala High Court, on 07 Aug 2009. The bench was M SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Kerala High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. CRL.MC No. 2523 of 2009). ← Search more judgments