IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: OF 2011 Revision filed under Sections 397 & 401 of CrI. P.C. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Peler, in CrI.MP.No.1855/2009 in MC.No.6/1998, dt.27-01-2011. Between: B Vishwanatha Naidu, S/o. Venkatamuni Naidu ^y^tp^'^ltivation, R/o Kaminenivaripalli V o ^ X • Hindu, Living Y.S. Gate Post, Irala Mandal, Chittoor ...PETITIONER/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT AND Dodlavaripalli, H/o Rompicherla Mandal, Chittoor District. AP HydeS" PradeshrSep.by its Public R/O Prosecutor, High Court of ...respondent/respondent LA. NO: 2 OF 2011(CRLRCMP. NO: 97fiA of 2011) Petition under Section 482 of CrI.P.C. circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i Court may be pleased to stay all further on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class praying that in the in support of the petition, the High proceedings in M.C.No. 6 of 1998 , Peler. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: P: RAVI KIRAN KOTHA NAGA SURYA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.2: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: % THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:1845 of 2011 ORDER: The Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the Petitioner/Fath er against the Respondent No.1/Daughter challenging the order dated 27.01.2011 in Crl.M.P.No.1855 of 2009 in M.C.No.6 of 1998 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Pieir, refusing to modify the order in Maintenance Case in M.C.No.06/1998 dated 15.06.1999 granting maintenance to Respondent No.1. 2. Heard both sides. Pursuant to the direction given by this Court on 25.04.2025, the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Chittoor has submitted a letter along with the statement of the parties with necessary identity proof that the 3. father and daughter viz., Petitioner/B.Viswanatha Naidu and Respondent No.l/B.Shirisha have settled their dispute and the Petitioner had paid an amount of Rs.1,64,000/- to the Respondent No.1 through her mother. The Respondent No.1 as a major has already got married to one R.Naveen Kumar, blessed with one female child and happily living with her husband.They are all residentsof RompicherlaMandal. 4. In view of the report of the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Chittoor, the submissions of the Petitioner and the Respondent No.1 in their statements, and the submissions of the learned Counsel for Petitioner and Respondent No.1, nothing remains in this Criminal Revision Case for further 2 adjudication and the Criminal Revision Case can be disposed of as compromised. 5. For the above reasons, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of as compromised. No order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- M. RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Peler. 2. One CC to Sri P. Ravi Kiran, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Kotha Naga Surya Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CC to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Chp •’ » f * RAM ► HIGH COURT DATED:16/06/2025 ORDER CRLRC.No.1845 of 2011 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE