High Court Kerala High Court

Sudhanya K.N. vs State Of Kerala on 25 October, 2007

Kerala High Court
Sudhanya K.N. vs State Of Kerala on 25 October, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Tr P(Crl) No. 80 of 2007()


1. SUDHANYA K.N., AGED 31 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. UMASANKAR VALSAN, 36 YEARS,

3. M.D.VALSAN, 63 YEARS,

4. VANAJA VALSAN, 58 YEARS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :25/10/2007

 O R D E R
                           R.BASANT, J.
                        ----------------------
                      T.P.(Crl.).No.80 of 2007
                    ----------------------------------------
             Dated this the 25th day of October 2007

                               O R D E R

This petition is for transfer of a petition under the

‘Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005’,

hereinafter called ‘DVA’ pending before the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery to Family Court, Kannur or any

other court. After discussions at the Bar, the learned counsel for

the petitioner fairly submits that in the light of the decision in

Mony v. Leelamma [2007(2)KLT 432], the prayer to transfer the

case from the criminal court to the Family Court may not be

maintainable. No sufficient reason has been shown to transfer

the case from the court before which it is pending to any other

criminal court also. Except that there has been no expeditious

disposal, no grievance is raised which can justify the prayer for

transfer.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner finally submits

that as some proceedings are pending before the Family Court

and the Family Court has the requisite legal competence under

Section 26 of the DVA to grant reliefs which are grantable under

Tr.P.Crl.No.80/07 2

the Act, the petitioner proposes not to press the application

before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and in turn seek

such relief from the Family Court under Section 26 of the DVA.

The petitioner, needless to say, shall be at liberty to pursue such

course, if he is advised to do the same.

3. I am satisfied that the prayer for transfer made in this

petition cannot be considered favourably in the light of the

decision in Mony v. Leelamma [2007(2)KLT 432].

4. This transfer petition is accordingly dismissed.





                                              (R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

             // True Copy//       PA to Judge

Tr.P.Crl.No.80/07    3

Tr.P.Crl.No.80/07    4

       R.BASANT, J.




         CRL.M.CNo.




            ORDER




21ST DAY OF MAY2007