Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 5756 Ker

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
                                      &
                   THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
            Friday, the 27th day of May 2022 / 6th Jyaishta, 1944

                              CRL.RC NO. 3 OF 2022

MC NO.5/2018 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT 1, ATTINGAL & CRL.APPEAL
       NO.102/2018 OF ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM




      SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS   ON THE BASIS OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED
      20/05/2022 IN OP(FC)   594 OF 2021, TR.P(CIVIL) NO.272/2021 AND WP (C)
      NO.27068 OF 2019. TO   REVISE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JUDGMENT IN
      CRL.APPEAL NO.102 OF   2018 BY THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE II,
      THRIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

 COMPLAINANTS/COMPLAINANT/ACCUSED:

   1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
      KERALA.
   2. SHAMNA, W/O SHAFI AZEEZ, AGED 30 YEARS, SHAFI MANZIL, MARUTHUMMOODU,
      ULIYAZHTHURA VILLAGE, PANTHALACODE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK.
      PIN 695028.
   3. NASEEMA BEEVI, AGED 72 YEARS, D/O PATHUMMA, SHAFI MANZIL,
      MARUTHUMMOODU, ULIYAZHTHURA VILLAGE, PANTHALACODE P.O,
      THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK PIN-695028.


      This Criminal revision case coming on for orders upon perusing the
 suo motu and the Public Prosecutor for 1ST respondent, the court passed
 the following.
             A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & SOPHY THOMAS, JJ.
        ------------------------------------------
                  Crl. Rev.(C) No.3/2022
        ------------------------------------------

                           O R D E R

Dated this the 27th day of May, 2022

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

We appoint Adv.Mariyam G.Tharakan as the counsel

for the revision petitioners in the light of the fact

that she is appearing in a connected matter.

Issue notice to the respondents.

We note that in the light of the judgment of the

Apex Court in Hiral P. Harsora and Others v. Kusum

Narottamdas Harsora and Others [(2016) 10 SCC 165], a

woman can also be a respondent in the proceedings

under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence

Act, 2005. However, taking note of the facts and

circumstances of this case, we need to protect the

petitioners' right to reside in the residential Crl Rev.(C) No.3/2022

building. Accordingly, we stay all further proceedings

pursuant to the impugned orders.

Post on 31/5/2022 along with connected matters.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

Sd/-

SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE ms

27-05-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar