Madras High CourtCRL RC(MD)/24/2018dismissed

Ali Fathima, v. Jaggir Hussain,

2018-01-10Honourable Mr Justice P. N. Prakash2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.01.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.R.C.(MD)No.24 of 2018 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.249 of 2018 Ali Fathima, Represented by her brother K.Mohammed Siddiq : Petitioner Vs.

Jaggir Hussain : Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to set aside the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, in Crl.M.P.No.302 of 2006 in M.C.No.9 of 1999, dated 27.04.2006. For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Suresh Kumar For Respondent : No appearance *********

ORDER

Ali Fathima initiated proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam in M.C.No.15 of 1994. This case was transferred to the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam and was re-numbered as M.C.No.9 of 1999. An exparte order of maintenance was passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam in favour of Ali Fathima. On the petition filed by Jaggir Hussain, the exparte order was set aside. Once again, Jaggir Hussain did not appear before the Trial Court. Therefore, a second exparte order was passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam in favour of Ali Fathima on 22.12.2005. Jaggir Hussain filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.302 of 2006 in M.C.No.9 of 1999 under Section 126(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the exparte order. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, by the impugned order dated 27.04.2006, set aside the exparte order dated 22.12.2005, challenging which, Ali Fathima has filed the present Criminal Revision Case.

2. The fact remains that the matter has been pending disposal from 1994 onwards and Ali Fathima has not seen the colour of coin till date. However, this Court is of the view that it will serve the interest of justice, if orders are passed by the Trial Court in M.C.No.9 of 1999 after giving full opportunities to both https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

parties. In such view of the matter, this is not a fit case in which the order dated 27.04.2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam requires interference by this Court.

3. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed with a further direction to the Trial Court to dispose of M.C.No.9 of 1999, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam.

+1cc to Mr.M.S.Suresh Kumar, Advocate Sr.No.41425 SML VB/KKR/SAR2/25/01/2018/2P/3C Order made in Crl.R.C.(MD)No.24 of 2018 10.01.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/