FARSANA P. S. Vs. RAZVEEN RAFFIQUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Sec. 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (wrongly quoted as Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), by the petitioners, challenging Annexure A6 order, whereby, the learned Sessions Judge stayed enforcement of order, dtd. 18/4/2024 in C.M.P.No.1341/2023 in M.C.No.18/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, granting maintenance at the rate of Rs.40,000.00 per month to the petitioners herein.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) At the time of admission hearing itself, the learned counsel for the petitioners, who are the petitioners in the M.C. and in the C.M.P., raised a question, after referring the decision of the Apex Court in Shalu Ojha v. Prashant Ojha reported in [(2015) 2 SCC 99] with reference to paragraph Nos.25, 26, 29 and 30 contending that, even though an interim order passed under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, 'the DV Act' hereinafter) is appealable under Sec. 29 of the DV Act, the appellate court has no power to pass interim orders, as the said power is not provided under the DV Act.