- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:7800 CRL.P No. 201272 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201272 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. RAGHAVENDRA S/O VASUDEVA P., AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: DIRECT SELLING AGENT, R/O. NEAR JHANDA KATTE, PATEL NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, HOSPET, VIJAYAPURA-583 201. 2. VASUDEVA P. S/O NARAYANA P., AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: CONTROLLER IN NEKSRTC, R/O. NEAR JHANDA KATTE, PATEL NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, HOSPET VIJAYANAGAR-583 201. 3. LALITHA W/O VASUDEVA P., AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. NEAR JHANDA KATTE, PATEL NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, HOSPET VIJAYANAGAR-583201. 4. MANJUNATHA S/O VASUDEVA P., AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. NEAR JHANDA KATTE, PATEL NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, HOSPET VIJAYANAGAR-583 201, (ACCUSED NO.4 AS PER CHARGE SHEET), (ADDRESS SHOWN BY THE COMPLAINANT), STUDENT AT M.P. BIRLA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:7800 CRL.P No. 201272 of 2025 RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU, STUDYING MBA, RESIDING AT H.NO. 33/2, BEHIND ADITYA ANUGRAH, 6TH AVENUE, F MAIN ROAD, PIPE LINE, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560003. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. NEERAJA @ LAXMI W/O RAGHAVENDRA, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KALLUR VILLAGE, TQ. SIRWAR, DIST. RAICHUR-584 129. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (OLD), UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.06.2025 IN CRL.MISC.NO. 79/2025 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT RAICHUR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:7800 CRL.P No. 201272 of 2025 ORAL ORDER In the captioned petition, the petitioner are primarily assailing the interim maintenance awarded by the Court under Section 12 of D.V.Act. The Court while allowing the application filed by the wife seeking interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month has allowed the application in part and granted interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per month pending consideration of the proceedings under Section 12 of D.V. Act. 2. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking setting aside of the impugned order granting interim maintenance of Rs.8000 per month , contending that the respondent has already set the criminal law in motion by lodging a complaint in Crime No.23/2024. It is their specific case that both the criminal prosecution and the proceedings under the D.V. Act arise out of the very same cause of action and, therefore, the respondent is not entitled to maintain parallel proceedings. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:7800 CRL.P No. 201272 of 2025 3. Heard the learned counsel on record. Perused the order impugned. 4. The short point that needs consideration is as to; "whether the in-laws (petitioner Nos. 2 to 4) are obligated to pay interim maintenance and the order granting interim maintenance needs warrants insofar as petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 are concerned." 5. It is not in dispute that petitioners 2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent/complainant, while petitioner No.4 is the brother-in-law. Petitioner No.4 is the younger brother of petitioner No.1, who is the husband of respondent/wife. It is the trite law that primary and statutory obligation to maintain the wife rests upon the husband. Interim maintenance cannot be mechanically imposed on the mother-in-law and father-in-law who themselves are dependant on her husband. Similarly, the brother-in-law - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:7800 CRL.P No. 201272 of 2025 is also not obligated to maintain sister-in-law when admittedly Section 12 application is filed against petitioner No.1/husband. The D.V. Act does not contemplate automatic or vicarious imposition of monetary liability on the in-laws. Though Section 20 of D.V. Act contemplates grant of monetary relief on a person who is shown to have committed domestic violence and who has the means and obligation to provide such relief. 6. In such circumstances, though the Court below was justified in granting interim maintenance, the Court below clearly erred in directing petitioner Nos.2 to 4 for payment of interim maintenance. Therefore, the order impugned needs to be modified. The trial Court has not adverted to the existence of economic abuse attributed to in-laws and brother-in-law. Petitioner No.4 who is the student and presently pursuing MBA at Bengaluru is also now directed to pay maintenance, when the primary responsibility of petitioner No.1 to pay interim maintenance. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:7800 CRL.P No. 201272 of 2025 7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is partly allowed. (ii) Maintenance order is set aside in so far as Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are concerned. (iii) Petitioner No.1 is directed to pay interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.8,000/- pending consideration of the proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.79/2025. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7 CT:SI