What is the procedure to be adopted by a Magistrate while dealing with an application filed under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005? Can an ex parte interim order without notice could be passed under section 23(2) without notice in favour of the aggrieved person? Whether along with a notice issued in an application filed under section 12 or 23(2), copy of the application is to be sent for service on the respondent? These are the questions to be decided in the petition.

2. Petitioner is the first respondent and second respondent the applicant in M.C.62/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ernakulam. Ext.P2 ex parte order was passed under section 23(2) of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act)without notice to the petitioner directing him not to enter into the compound of the house of the parents of the second respondent wife and also directing him to pay Rs.2500/-per month as an interim maintenance to the second respondent until further orders. Notice was issued to the respondent by Ext.P1 order dated 21.10.2009 in Form No.32 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the Form prescribed for issuing notice to the complainant under section 173 or 202 after making necessary alterations to appear on 31.10.2009. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Ext.P2 order. Learned counsel submitted that as the petitioner is not liable to pay the amount as provided under Ext.P2 and is aggrieved by the order, he has already filed an appeal before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam challenging Ext.P2 order as provided under section 29 of the Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

4. In view of the order to be passed in this petition, it is not necessary to issue notice to the second respondent, as Ext.P2 order is not to be varied or set aside in this petition, in view of the pendency of statutory appeal against Ext.P2 before the Sessions Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the subordinate courts dealing with the petitions filed under section 12 are not following the procedure provided under the Act and the Rules. It is submitted that even if an interim order is passed under section 23(2) of the Act, copy of the application filed under section 12 or application filed for interim order under section 23 are not being sent along with the order or notice, so that respondents to whom the notice is served cannot properly defend the case by appearing before the learned Magistrate. It is pointed out that Magistrates should be directed to serve copies of the petition along with the notice and interim orders. It is also pointed out that though the Rules provide Form VII notice to be served on the respondent, notices are not being issued in that Form and as a result on service of the order or notice, respondent cannot realise in what application the order is passed. In the light of the said submissions, the Registrar (Subordinate Judiciary) was directed to call for reports from all the Chief Judicial Magistrate and to submit a report whether the courts are following the procedure provided under the Act and the Rules.

6. The report submitted by the Registrar, based on the reports obtained from the Chief Judicial Magistrates, discloses that there is no uniform practice being followed by the various courts of the State trying applications filed under section 12 of the Act. It is also seen that in some courts, copies of the petition filed under section 12 are being forwarded along with the notice to be served on the respondent while in some courts it is not being done. So also in some courts notices are being issued in Form VII and in some other courts notices are being served without any prescribed Form. In such circumstances, it is necessary to give necessary directions to the trial courts to be followed in trial of applications