APHC010356022019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.No.1 of 2019 IN / AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1148/2019 Between: M RAJU BABU, S/O. ARJUN, R/O.D.NO. 444-14-108/9, 80 FEET ROAD, K.V.STAFF QUARTERS, WARD, VISAKHAPTNAM ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI. 2. MUSIYA CHAKRAMMA, W/O. MUSIYA RAJU, R/O. D.NO. C-95-5, CHODAVARAM, CHODAVARAM POST AND MANDAL, VISAKHAPTNAM ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G RAMA GOPAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: The instant Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the Petitioner seeking to set aside the Order dated 28.02.2019 passed in F.C.O.P.No.1711 of 2015 by the learned Judge, Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam. 2. I.A.No.1 of 2019 is filed by the Petitioner seeking to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the above Criminal Revision Case. 3. Heard Sri G.Rama Gopal, learned counsel for the Petitioner. 2 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, after passing of the order dated 28.02.2019, the Petitioner could not get the record from his counsel within time. As such, a delay of 121 days in filing the revision occurred. It is further submitted that the delay is neither wilful nor deliberate. 5. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor is in attendance. 6. Considering the submissions made and as can be seen from the affidavit filed by the Petitioner, the reason mentioned therein for the said delay, is no tenable and sufficient to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the revision. Even as seen from the impugned order, the same is well reasoned. The learned trial Judge by taking into consideration the income of the Petitioner @ Rs.14,000/- per month, adequately granted maintenance to his wife @ Rs.4,000/-. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that there are no tenable grounds to interfere in the said order. This Court does not find any reason to condone the delay of 121 days in filing the revision case. 7. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2019 is dismissed. Consequently, the Criminal Revision Case is also dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:01.04.2026 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.No.1 of 2019 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 1148/2019 Dt.01.04.2026 Dinesh