JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL) 1. Heard learned counsel, Mr. P. Sahu for the petitioners and learned counsel, Mr. A. Sengupta for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and learned Addl. P.P., Mr. R.C. Debnath for the respondent No.4. 2. The petitioners preferred an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005 (for short, PWDV Act) seeking protection from domestic violence, separate residential accommodation as well as maintenance etc. in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala which was subsequently transferred to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Agartala. The petitioners also preferred interim application seeking interim maintenance, interim protection and separate interim accommodation pending final disposal of the case. The interim application was registered as Misc. Case No.2424 of 2012 in connection with CR 148 of 2012. The interim application filed by the petitioners was rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class by impugned order dated 12.10.2012. 3. Aggrieved, the petitioners preferred Criminal Appeal No. 46(4) of 2012 in the Court of Sessions Judge, Agartala which was transferred to the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.3 and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge by order dated 15.05.2013 dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the trial Court. 4. Grievance of the petitioners is that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court made some observations that the petitioners could not prove her case for granting interim relief. There was no observation that the findings in the interim application should not influence the final adjudication of the original application. 5. Learned counsel, Mr. Sahu submits that the original petition filed by the petitioners i.e. CR 148 of 2012 is pending and that may be disposed of on its own merit according to law. 6. Learned counsel, Mr. Sengupta appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 fairly submits that the original application shall be decided on its own merit in accordance with law without having been influenced by the order passed in the interim application. 7. 6. Learned counsel, Mr. Sengupta appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 fairly submits that the original application shall be decided on its own merit in accordance with law without having been influenced by the order passed in the interim application. 7. In view of the above submissions of learned counsel of the parties, the criminal petition is disposed of with a direction that the trial Court i.e. learned Magistrate should dispose of the original application i.e. CR 148 of 2012 on its own merit in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made in the interim application and in the appeal made against the interim application. 8. With the above observation, the criminal petition stands disposed of. 9. Send back the L.C. records along with a copy of this judgment.