- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1218 CRL.RP No. 826 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 826 OF 2017 BETWEEN: GANESH KUMAR S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA, R/A CHIKKTIMASANDRA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT, WORKING AS CONSTABLE RAILWAY STATE POLICE, BANGALORE CITY RAILWAY STATION, BANGALORE- 562125. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RENSPRE PRITHESH D'SOUZA, ADVOCATE) AND: HEMAVATHI W/O GANESH KUMAR R/AT NO.11, KAGALIPURA, NEAR FOREST OFFICE, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE DISTRICT, BANGALORE- 560061. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.K.LOKESHA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.399 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1218 CRL.RP No. 826 of 2017 COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE COURT OF IX ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE IN CRL.A.NO.41/2015 DATED 10.04.2017 AND ALSO THE ORDER PASSED BY THE II A.C.J.M., BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE IN CRL.MISC.NO.22/2013 DATED 30.06.2015 DIRECTING THE PETITIONER HEREIN TO PAY A SUM OF RS.7,000/- PER MONTH TO THE PETITIONER FOR HER MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL DISPOSAL, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER Petitioner is before this Court in this Criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.PC, with a prayer to set aside the Order dated 30.06.2015 passed in Crl.Misc.No.22/2013 by the Court of II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru and the order dated 10.04.2017 passed in Crl.A.No.41/2015 by the Court of IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Petitioner is the husband of the respondent. Crl.Misc.No.22/2013 was filed by the respondent herein - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1218 CRL.RP No. 826 of 2017 before the Jurisdictional Court of Magistrate, Bangalore under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2005) claiming reliefs as provided under Section 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Act of 2005. The Trial Court vide the order impugned dated 30.06.2015 had partly allowed the petition and directed petitioner to pay sum of Rs.7,000/- per month to the respondent towards her maintenance from the date of petition. Petitioner was also prohibited from committing any act of domestic violence against the respondent. The said order was unsuccessfully challenged by the petitioner herein in Crl.A.No.41/2015 before the Court of IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. Aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that though the gross salary of the petitioner was Rs.17,575/- in year 2013, his net salary was only Rs.6,323/- and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1218 CRL.RP No. 826 of 2017 therefore the Trial Court was not justified in directing the petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.7,000/- to the respondent. He submits that petitioner is required to maintain his aged mother, who is suffering from ill health. Petitioner is ready and willing to take care of his two children, who are now looked after by the respondent/wife. Accordingly, he prays to allow this petition. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has argued in support of the order impugned. 6. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. The marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 26.05.2010 and from the said wedlock, two children are born to the couple. It is not in dispute that the children are in custody of the respondent/wife and she has been taking care of them. Petitioner, who was earlier working as a police constable, is now working as a police head constable. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1218 CRL.RP No. 826 of 2017 7. Material on record would go to show that as on the date of filing of the petition, petitioner was drawing monthly gross salary of Rs.17,675/-. No material has been produced by the petitioner to show that his wife is earning. It is not in dispute that petitioner and the respondent/wife are residing separately and therefore, the burden to maintain the respondent/wife and the two children who are in her custody is on the petitioner herein. 8. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner who was earlier working as a police constable is now promoted and is working as police head constable and his gross salary per month is Rs.63,000/- and net salary is Rs.29,000/-. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that the orders impugned passed by the Courts below granting Rs.7,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent/wife who is also taking care of her two children cannot be said to be on the higher side. The impugned orders cannot be said to be arbitrary or - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1218 CRL.RP No. 826 of 2017 perverse in nature. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the same does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the following: ORDER The Criminal revision petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46