APHC010141722010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI BBS MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 358 OF 2010 Revision filed under Section 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C., aggrieved by the Common Order dated 03.12.2009 passed in MC.No.85 of 2008 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry. Between: Dudde Trinadha Rao, S/o. Late Veerraju, Hindu, Contractor, Aged 55 years, R/o. D.No. 22-1-29, Ada Sadhuvula Matham, Veerabhadrapuram, Rajahmundry-533105, East Godavari District. ...Petitioner/1®* Respondent AND 1. Dudde Bullammai, W/o. Late Veerraju, Hindu, Old Lady, 67 Years, R/o. 23-16-54, Haripuram, At Present residing at C/o. Thota Bullemma, D.No. 23-15-32, Subhashnagar, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. 2. Dudde Appa Rao @ Kondala Rao, S/o. Late Veerraju, Hindu, Labour Contractor, aged 52 years, R/o. D.No. 22-1-29, Ada Sadhuvula Matham, Veerabhadrapuram, Rajahmundy -533105, East Godavari District [Not necessary party] 3. Dudde Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Late Veerraju, Hindu, Workshop, R/o. D.No. 20-5-1, Opp: Padmasai Apartments, Sriramnagar, Rajahmundry- 533 105, East Godavari District.[Not necessary party] L'f^ 4. The State of A.P., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P.,Hyderabad ...Respondents/Petitioner/Respondents No. 2 & 3 lA NO: 1 OF 2010 (CRLRCMP 531 OF 2010) Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings of the order of Maintenance dated 03.12.2009 granted by the court of the Judge, Family Court-cum- Additional District Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry, in M.C.No.101 of 2008. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P.Rajesh Babu Counsel for Respondent No.1: Sri K.Venkatesh Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3: -- Counsel for Respondent No.4: Public Prosecutor The Court made the following Order: - APHC010141722010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 358/2010 Between: DUDDE TRINADHA RAO,, S/0. LATE VEERRAJU, CONTRACTOR, R/0. D.NO. 22-1-29, ADA SADHUVULA MATHAM, VEERABHADRAPURAM, ...PETITIONER AND 1.DUDDE BULLAMMAI AND 3 OTHERS, W/0. LATE VEERRAJU, R/0. 23-16-54, HARIPURAM, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT C/0. THOTA BULLEMMA, D.NO. 23-15-32, SUBHASHNAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, 2.DUDDE APPA RAO KONDALA RAO, S/O.LATEVEERRAJU,LABOUR CONTRACTOR, R/OP. D.NO. 22-1-29, ADA SADHUVULA MATHAM, VEERABHADRAPURAM, RAJAHMUNDRHY -533105, 3. DUDDE VENKATESWARA RAO, S/0. LATE VEERRAJU, WORKSHOP, R/0. D.NO. 20-5-1, OPP PADMASAI APARTMENTS, SRIRAMNAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY-533 105, 4.THE STATE OF A P REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P.,HYDERABAD ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: P RAJESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): Dr.YLRj ^ Crl.R.C.No.358of201C ^ Dated 07.07.2025 ^ 1.MADHAVI PUNNA (LEGAL 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: order aid COUNSEL) Heard the learned counsel and the learned Assistant counsel for the petitioner, Public Prosecutor. the learned legal aid 2- The Criminal Revision 397 and 401 of the Case has been Code of Criminal Procedure, order dated 26.11.2009 i Judge, Family Court-Cum Rajahmundry, granting Rs.6,000/- Preferred under Sections 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C’) challenging the by the learned in M.C.No.SS of 2008 -Additional District Court, maintenance to respondent Nos. 2 per month as respondent No. 1/mother and 3. of the petitioner and the 3- The mother filed the that is, when she 3udge, Family Court as P.W.1 and other relatives respondent No. 1, marked Exs.P1 maintenance case at the tag end of her life, learned examining the mother petitioner herein was beyond the age of sexagenarian. The granted maintenance after as P.Ws.2 and 3. The to 11 and Ex.R-1. as The relationship between in dispute. The the petitioner and petitioner vis-a-vis his respondent No.1 is not position of the avocation as 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.R,C.No.358 of 2010 Dated 07.07.2025 contractor is sufficient to maintain his mother, who is at the fag end of her life. The contentions raised by the petitioner before the learned Trial Court were all negated. 5. On careful analysis of the entire evidence, the learned Trial Court granted maintenance to respondent No. 1/mother, it is the bounden duty of the petitioner, being the son of respondent No.1, to maintain her. There are no grounds whatsoever to interfere with the order passed by the learned Trial Court. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case is liable to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- V DIWAKAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. 2. One CC to Sri P.Rajesh Babu, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri K.Venkatesh, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CC’s to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 6. Three CD Copies GPC vna HIGH COURT DATED: 07/07/2025 ORDER CRLRC NO. 358 OF 2010 ^ 17 SEP 2025 j|] rrentSectiopxC^ DISMISSING THIS CRIMINAL REVISION CASE