MURUGAN Vs. KASIMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the sake of convenience, the names of the parties as mentioned in the complaint filed before the Judicial Magistrate Court are referred to in this order.

(2.) The following are the allegations contained in the complaint filed by the complainant under Section 12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short 'the Act') and Section 200 Code of Criminal Procedure :

(3.) Mr. V. Thirumal, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents in the complaint would contend that the learned Judicial Magistrate has miserably failed to take note of the Domestic Incident Report filed by the Protection Officer, that the first respondent is an agricultural coolie who is earning Rs. 2,000/- only per month as evident from the Certificate issued by the Tahsildar Office, Madurai, that had the report been considered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, he would not have passed such order and that necessary opportunities were not extended to these respondents.