1 APHC010050102024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] SATURDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 120/2024 Between: 1. ALAPATI VENKATA SAI RAM, S/O.SATYANARAYANA, D.NO.42-52- 5A, AJITH SINGH NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P., PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ...PETITIONER AND 1. ALAPATI LAKSHMI CHANDANA KUMARI, W/O. VENKATA SAI RAM, AGED 27 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.1-147, MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHIVALAYA VELLAMPALLI VILLAGE, MADDIAPDU MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2. ALAPATI VAAG DEVI, D/O.VENKATA SAI RAM, AGED 4 YEARS, R/O.D.NO. 1-147, MAIN ROAD, NEAR SHIVALAYAM, VELLAMPALLI VILLAGE, MADDIAPDU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. (RESPONDENT NO.2 BEING MINOR REP.BY NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER 1ST RESPONDENT) 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AT HIGH COURT OF A.P., AMARAVATI. ...RESPONDENT(S): Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased topleased to 27-11- 2023 passed in Cn.M.P.No. 228 of 2022 In M.C.No. 23 of 2022 on the file of 2 The Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Spl.Moblle Court, Ongole in the interest Of justice and 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 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. A.SAI ROHIT 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 120/2024 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is filed challenging the order dated 27.11.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Ongole, in Crl.M.P. No. 228 of 2022 in M.C. No. 23 of 2022. 2. None represented for the petitioner. 3. The petitioner is the husband of respondent No.1. Respondent No.1, being the wife of the petitioner, filed the above Crl.M.P. under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance for herself and respondent No.2, their minor daughter. The learned Magistrate, upon consideration of the material available on record, partly allowed the petition and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month to respondent Nos.1 and 2 towards maintenance. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is filed. 4. As seen from the record, the impugned order pertains to grant of interim maintenance. The case of the wife is that the petitioner is working as a Software Engineer in Accenture and earning about Rs.1,30,000/- per month. It is further stated that due to harassment in the matrimonial home, she was constrained to live separately along with the minor child. The learned Magistrate, basing on the pleadings of both parties and the submissions made, granted interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month in total to the wife and minor daughter. Having regard to the nature of the order under challenge, this Court is of the view that the same does not warrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. The learned Magistrate has taken into consideration the prima facie needs of the wife and child and the earning 4 capacity of the husband while granting interim maintenance. The amount awarded cannot be said to be excessive or arbitrary, particularly at the interim stage. It is well settled that interim maintenance is intended to provide immediate support pending disposal of the main case. This Court finds no illegality, irregularity, or perversity in the impugned order. 5. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. However, considering that the main case is of the year 2022, the learned Judicial Magistrate is directed to dispose of M.C. No. 23 of 2022 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Both parties are at liberty to raise all their contentions before the trial Court, and the learned Magistrate shall decide the matter on its own merits and in accordance with law. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 07.03.2026 KKV 5 138 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 120 OF 2024 07.03.2026 KKV