APHC010564262025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 1206/2025 Between: BOBBURI RAMBABU, S/O BOBBURI KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, FORMERLY WORKING AS PRO IN A PRIVATE HOSPITAL / PRESENTLY UNEMPLOYED,R/O. D.NO. 10-27, MAIN ROAD, GUTTIKONDA (VILLAGE AND POST), PIDUGURALLA (MANDAL), PALNADU DISTRICT - 522413. AADHAAR NO. 3666 2051 7463. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., AMARAVATHI. 2. BOBBURI RAMANA KUMARI, W/O. BOBBURI RAMBABU, D/O SIMBOTHULA KONDA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 4-16-210, 5TH LANE, POTTISRIRAMULU NAGAR, GUNTUR - 522002. AADHAAR NO. 6148 8613 5453. 3. BOBBURI PAVITHRA, D/O. BOBBURI RAMBABU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 4-16-210, 5TH LANE, POTTISRIRAMULU NAGAR, GUNTUR - 522002. AADHAAR NO. 6790 0221 8401. 4. BOBBURI KRISHNA HARSHITH, S/O. BOBBURI RAMBABU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 4-16-210, 5TH LANE, POTTISRIRAMULU NAGAR, GUNTUR - 522002. AADHAAR NO. 7863 3241 9691. (RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 BEING MINORS, REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER. RESPONDENT NO.2 - SMT. BOBBURI RAMANA KUMARI) ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA REDDY SANGATI 2 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: The instant Criminal Revision Case under Sections 438 and 442 of BNSS has been filed by the Petitioner seeking to set aside the Order dated 24.06.2024 passed in F.C.O.P.No.612 of 2023 by the learned Family Judge-cum-XII Additional District Judge, Guntur. 2. I.A.No.1 of 2025 is filed by the Petitioner seeking to condone the delay of 371 days in filing the above Criminal Revision Case. 3. Heard Sri Srinivasa Reddy Sangati, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor is in attendance. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the maintenance granted by the learned trial Judge is not sustainable since the same was granted without considering the earning capacity of the Petitioner. It is further submitted that Respondent No.1 is employed and is getting sufficient income to maintain herself. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 6. Considering the submissions made and as can be seen from the record, an amount of Rs.10,000/- to Respondent No.1 and Rs.5,000/- each to Respondent Nos.2 and 3 was granted as maintenance by the 3 learned trial Judge vide Order dated 24.06.2024 in F.C.O.P.612 of 2023. The record further shows that, before the trial Court, the Petitioner herein was set ex parte. In fact, an application was also filed before the trial Court to set aside the ex parte order. No material has been placed before this Court with regard to the disposal of the said application. 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 371 days in filing the revision case. 7. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2025 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:22.01.2026 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.No.1 of 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 1206/2025 Dt.22.01.2026 Dinesh