SEEMA NAYAK W/O RAJESH NAYAK Vs. H. RAJESH NAYAK S/O RAMAN NAYAK AND SRI. RAMAN NAYAK S/O PANDURANGA NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides finally in respect of the petition filed, calling in question the order passed by the court below in Crl. Misc. No. 50/10, by which order the Petitioner herein was directed to file the present petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('the Act' for short) before the jurisdictional Court namely at the place where she was residing at Udupi.

(2.) PETITIONERS Counsel argued that the impugned order is contrary to the provisions, of Section 27 of the Act and stressing the word 'temporary residence' and also relying on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Sharad Kumar Pandey v. Mamta Pandey, submission made is that the Petitioner is now residing with her sister at Bangalore and therefore, the Petitioner has every right to file the petition beforethe Court at Bangalore. In support of the above submission concerning the Petitioner residing at Banglore. learned Counsel also referred to various documents filed along with the petition apart from touching upon the merits of the case.

(3.) THOUGH both sides have argued thus concerning the Petitioner's residence, in view of Section 29 of the Act, providing for an appeal to the Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate, in this case, the petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be entertained and the Petitioner therefore has to be exhaust the remedy of the appeal as provided under Section 29 of the Act It is under these circumstances, I refrain from touching upon the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties as regard to the residence of the Petitioner.