IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 36790 of 2009(Q)
1. KHATIJA HANIF MERCHANT,AGED 35 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY STATION
... Respondent
2. THE COMMISSION ER OF POLICE,KOCHI.
3. MOHAMMED HANIF MERCHANT,
For Petitioner :SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :02/06/2010
O R D E R
* * * *V.*RAMKUMAR,*J.* * * *
* * * * * * * *
W.P. (C) No. 36790 of 2009
* *Dated: * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * *
2nd June, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the wife of the 3rd respondent and she is
at present permanently residing at Mumbai. She had filed a
petition under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005 before the Metropolitan Magistrate , 15th
Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai against the third respondent and the
same is pending as C.C. 312/MISC/2007. Since the 3rd
respondent did not respond to the summons, the Mumbai Court
has issued non-bailable warrants of arrest against him in his
address at Fort Kochi. The petitioner would allege that on
account of the lethargy of the 2nd respondent Commissioner of
Police, warrants issued against the 3rd respondent are not
executed. It is the case of the petitioner that with a view to
evade the process of the Mumbai Court and to deter the
petitioner from prosecuting her application before the Mumbai
Court, the 3rd respondent has initiated a malicious prosecution
W.P. (C) No. 36790 of 2009 -:2:-
against the petitioner before the J.F.C.M. I, Kochi and has
secured a warrant of arrest in C.C. 1381 of 2008. She, therefore,
seeks appropriate directions against the first and second
respondents to take appropriate steps to execute the arrest
warrant obtained by the petitioner against the 3rd respondent
from the Mumbai Court and to keep in abeyance the arrest
warrant obtained by the 3rd respondent from the Kochi Court.
2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions,
submitted that warrants against the 3rd respondent could not be
executed for the reason that he was not available in the address
shown and that he was available in the said address only 7 years
ago.
3. If, according to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent is
evading the process of the Mumbai Court and it is to avoid an
arrest by the police that he has approached the Kochi Court
with a malicious prosecution against the petitioner, the proper
course for the petitioner would be to approach the Kochi Court
and appraise the learned Magistrate of the true facts. Hence,
this Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to
appear before the J.F.C.M. I, Kochi in C.C. 1381 of 2008 and
W.P. (C) No. 36790 of 2009 -:3:-
seek appropriate orders after appraising the Magistrate about
the true facts. Warrants, if any, pending the petitioner shall
not be enforced by the Kochi Court for a period of one month
and the fate of those warrants shall be subject to further orders
to be passed by the Kochi Court.
Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010.
Sd/-V. RAMKUMAR,
(JUDGE)
/true copy/
ani. P.S. to Judge