APHC010042542020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 647/2020 Between: 1. GAJULA VENKATA NARAYANA, S/O. VENKATESWARLU, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE CLERK IN A BOOK SHOP, C. MUNI REDDY, R/O. H. NO. 409, BHAVANI NAGAR, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OFFICE LANE, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI 2. GAJULA MASTAN RAMA BHAVANI, W/O. VENKATA NARAYANA, D/O. INAPAKOLLA MASTAN BABU, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O, 10TH WARD, NEAR SRI RAMA DATTA SAI TEMPLE, MARKAPUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. GAJULA TRIPURA TEJASRI, D/O. VENKATA NARAYANA, AGED 12 YEARS, R/O. 10 WARD, NEAR SRI RAMA DATTA SAL TEMPLE, MARKAPUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3RD RESPONDENT REP. BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS NATURAL GUARDIAN WHO IS THE MOTHER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to quash the Order dt. 03.11.2010 passed in MC No. 22 of 2008 on the file of the court of Learned Addl. Judicial 2 Magistrate of First Class, Markapur in so far as confirmed portion of Order dt. 17.06.2019 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 110 of 2017 on the file of the court of learned VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Markapur is concerned and consequently dismiss the maintenance claim of 2nd respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased pleased to dispense with the filing of certified copy of Order dt. 03.11.2010 passed in MC No. 22 of 2008 on the file of the court of Learned Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur and to receive the main Criminal Petition on file in the Interests of justice and to pas IA NO: 2 OF 2020 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of enforcement of Order dt. 03.11.2010 passed in MC No. 22 of 2008 on the file of the court of Learned Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur as confirmed by an Order dt. 17.06.2019 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 110 of 2017 on the file of the court of learned VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Markapur, pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. PARTHASARADHY ACHUTA 3 The Court made the following: ORDER : The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashment of the proceedings against him in M.C.No.22 of 2008, on the file of the Court of the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Markapur, Prakasam District, and also the order dated 17.06.2019 in Criminal Revision Petition No.110 of 2017, on the file of the Court of the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Markapur. 2. Heard Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is the husband of respondent No.2, who challenged the order passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.110 of 2017, wherein it was prayed to reduce the maintenance by granting Rs.3,000/- per month towards maintenance to the wife and the daughter. Learned counsel would submit that unofficial respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein are the wife and daughter of the petitioner. In M.C.No.22 of 2008, Rs.1,000/- per month was granted as maintenance to the wife and the daughter. Thereafter, they filed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking enhancement of such maintenance, which was partly allowed on 16.11.2017 by granting Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.5,000/- per month to the minor daughter. The petitioner thereafter preferred a Criminal Revision Case, which was partly allowed by reducing the maintenance to 4 Rs.3,000/- per month each to respondent Nos.2 and 3. Learned counsel would further submit that the petition may be allowed. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. Considering the submissions made and upon a fair look at the material placed on record, this Court is of the view that the impugned order does not warrant interference, since it is a reasoned order. Admittedly, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the wife and minor daughter of the petitioner. The educational qualification of respondent No.2 is not a criterion to reduce the maintenance already awarded to her. 6. Hence, this Court does not find any merit in the contention of the petitioner that he is unable to maintain himself and pay maintenance to his wife and minor daughter. The petition, therefore, lacks substance and deserves to be dismissed. 7. In the result, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 24-07-2025 MH 5 92 HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.647 of 2020 Dt.24.07.2025 MH