APHC010470502024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1062/2024 Between: 1. BUKKE LAKSHMA NAIK,, S/O. LATE BUKKE PEERE NAIK, AGED 54 YEARS, OCCU- WORKING AS DEE IN SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P.LTD, AT OSD/T-2 KADAPA, KADAPA DIVISION, KADAPA CITY, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. 2. BUKKE NARASAMMA, W/O. BUKKE LAKSHMA NAIK, AGED 42 YEARS,R/O.PLOT NO. 104, SYMPANI APARTMENT, PRAKASH NAGAR, KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Revision filed under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to call for entire records connected to Order dated 23.09.2024 passed in CrI.M.P No.111 of 2024 in MC No. 36 of 2024 on the file of the court of learned Judge Family Court-cum-VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa, examine the same and set it aside and consequently dismiss that petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased 2 may be pleased to order stay of all further proceedings including enforcement of Order dt. 23.09.2024 passed in CrI.M.P No. 111 of 2024 in MC No. 36 of 2024 on the file of the court of learned Judge Family Court-cum-VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa, pending disposal of the main Criminal Revision Case and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AMANCHI ROYAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1062/2024 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set-aside the order dated 23.09.2024 passed in CrI.M.P No.111 of 2024 in MC No.36 of 2024 by the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa, granting interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 and her two children. 2. Heard Sri Amanchi Royal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing on behalf of the State. 3. The respondent No.2/wife filed M.C.No.36 of 2024 on the file of learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa seeking maintenance against the petitioner. During the pendency of the said M.C., she filed a petition for interim maintenance, wherein, the learned Judge after taking into the consideration the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, granted interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month to the wife and two children of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is preferred. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the interim maintenance granted by the learned Trial Court is on the higher side. The learned Judge failed to consider the substantial recurring expenses and the 4 existing financial liabilities borne by the petitioner. Learned counsel would further submit that the Trial Court awarded interim maintenance without considering that neither party had filed affidavits disclosing their assets and liabilities. It is also contended that the Trial Court failed to note that Respondent No. 2, the wife of the petitioner, had not impleaded the children as parties to the proceedings; nevertheless, the learned Trial Court granted interim maintenance for the children as well. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders, as the impugned order pertains only to interim maintenance. 6. As can be seen from the record, the present revision has been preferred against the order granting interim maintenance. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that it is not in dispute that the wife and children are residing separately from the petitioner, nor is there any dispute regarding the relationship between the petitioner herein and respondent No. 2. The contentions raised in the present revision are disputed questions of fact, and this is not the appropriate stage to determine the genuineness or otherwise of the claims made by the parties. The learned Trial Judge, after taking into consideration the material placed before him, passed the impugned order. Hence, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds warranting interference with the said order. 7. Considering the submissions made, since this revision is preferred challenging the order dated 23.09.2024 passed in CrI.M.P No.111 of 2024 in 5 MC No.36 of 2024 by the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa, granting interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 /wife, and children, it is apposite to dispose of the present revision without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties with a direction to the learned Trial Judge to dispose of the main case i.e., MC No.36 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournment in a casual way by mere asking, preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The parties are at liberty to raise all their contentions before the Trial Court during the course of enquiry. Learned Trial Judge may appreciate the same and take appropriate decision according to law, without being influenced by any observation made by this Court in the present revision. 8. With the above observations, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of at the stage of admission. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 07.04.2026. UPS 6 25 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1062/2024 Dt.07.04.2026 UPS