Menaka v. Mohanambal

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.07.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and C.M.P.(MD).Nos.6533 of 2025 1.Menaka 2.Sobana 3.Indirani 4.Muthambalam

...Petitioners

Vs.

1.Mohanambal 2.Vigneswaran 3.Saraswathi

...Respondents

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to strike off the proceedings made in D.V.C.No.44 of 2024 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Judicial Magistrate Level, Karur District. For Petitioners : Mr.M.Karunakaran For R-1 : Mr.T.Joshua * * * * * 1/5

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to strike off the proceedings made in D.V.C.No.44 of 2024 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Judicial Magistrate Level, Karur District.

2. The petitioners herein are respondent Nos.3 to 6 in D.V.C.No.44 of 2024 before the trial Court. The first respondent herein has filed D.V.C.No.44 of 2024, on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Judicial Magistrate Level, Karur District, under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is the sister-in-law of the first respondent. The second and third petitioners are aunt of the second respondent. The fourth petitioner is the uncle of the second respondent. The second respondent is the husband and the third respondent is the mother-in-law of the first respondent. The first respondent has initiated domestic violence proceedings against her husband, her mother-inlaw and the petitioners herein. It is submitted that the petitioners are in no way connected with the allegations made by the first respondent in the DVC case and though the second respondent is ready and willing to live with the first respondent, it is only the first respondent who is not coming to live with him and has initiated the present case. Therefore, he prays that the petitioners may 2/5

be permitted to raise all the grounds mentioned herein before the trial court. He also requests this Court to dispense with their personal appearance before the trial court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submits that if this Court is inclined to dispense with the appearance of the petitioners, this Court may impose requisite conditions to see to it that the presence of the petitioners at the times, during which the presence of the petitioners is mandatory be safeguarded so that the petitioner does not frustrate the trial proceedings by dragging on the same to the detriment of the first respondent.

5. This Court, taking into consideration the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, permits the petitioners to raise all the grounds as raised herein before the trial court at the time of trial. Taking into consideration the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, their appearance before the trial court is dispensed with except for their appearance for the purpose of receiving the copy of the proceedings u/s 230 of BNSS, framing of charges, questioning under Section 351 of BNSS and on the day on which judgment is to be pronounced. However, if for any particular reason, the presence of the petitioners is necessary, the trial court, at its wisdom, shall direct them to appear on those days.

3/5

6. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

14.07.2025 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No TSG To 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Judicial Magistrate Level, Karur. 2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

M.DHANDAPANI , J.

TSG 14.07.2025 5/5