CRL RC No. 1286 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED CRL RC No. 1286 of 2026 J. Kannadasan alies Isreal ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Nithya alies Angelin Syndia Minor Daughter of by mother and Natural Guardian, No.12/25, P.V. Koil Street, Royapuram, Chennai-600 013. 2. K. Beulauh Florencia Minor Daughter of by mother and Natural Guardian, No.12/25, P.V. Koil Street, Royapuram, Chennai-600 013. ..Respondent(s) The Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 & 401 of the Cr.P.C., to call for the records at the order dated 12-02-2026 made in M.C. No.52 of 2019 by the Learned II Additional Family Court at Chennai and set aside the same and allow this revision petition and pass such other order or orders as this Honorable Court. For Petitioner(s): MR.P.Gunaraj ORDER This Criminal Revision Case is filed to quash the order dated 12-02-2026 made in M.C. No.52 of 2019 by the Learned II Additional Family Court at Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL RC No. 1286 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 2. The facts of the case are that the Revision Petitioner and the 1st Respondent got married on 13.04.2019 and the 2nd Respondent is the minor female child, born to them. The 1st Respondent had filed MC.No.52 of 2019, seeking maintenance before the Trial Court. The learned Trial Court, by the impugned order dated 12.02.2026, a sum of Rs.20,000/- p.m. was ordered to be paid to the Respondents (Rs.10,000/- to the 1st Respondent and Rs.10,000/- to the female child/2nd Respondent) as maintenance. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the Revision Petitioner, seeking the relief, as stated above. 3. This Court heard Mr.P.Gunaraj, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner. Since no adverse order is passed against the respondents, notice to them is dispensed with. 4. The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the court below failed to appreciate the fact that the 1st Respondent voluntarily refused to live with him, without any reasonable cause and that without considering the liabilities and the financial status of the Revision Petitioner and also the source of income available to the 1st Respondent, the Trial Court had passed the impugned order, granting maintenance to the tune of Rs.20,000/- p.m. to the 1st Respondents and the female child/2nd Respondent and that https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL RC No. 1286 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 without proper application of mind, the impugned order had been passed in a mechanical manner and hence, this Criminal Revision Case is liable to be allowed, as prayed for. 5. This Court considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the entire materials placed on record. 6. The fact that the Revision Petitioner is the husband of the 1st Respondent and they got a female child/2nd Respondent, have not been denied. The amount fixed towards maintenance by the Court Below is Rs.20,000/- for the respondents, which, in the present days of rising prices and high cost of living, cannot be considered as excessive or disproportionate or unreasonable. The said monetary relief granted to the Respondents, by the courts below is adequate, fair and reasonable and consistent with the standard of living, to which the aggrieved person is accustomed. The provisions of Section 144 of BNSS are enacted to stop the vagrancy of a destitute wife/child and provide some succour to them, who are entitled to get the maintenance, which cannot be denied. Further, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has not been able to point out any illegality or impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned orders, granting such quantum of maintenance, warranting interference by this Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL RC No. 1286 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 7. In such circumstances, to meet the ends of justice, the impugned orders does not require any interference by this Court, as this court does not find any illegality or impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned orders and this Criminal Revision Case lacks merits and hence, it is liable to be dismissed. 8. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case stands dismissed, as devoid of merits. There is no order as to costs. 08-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No rli To The Judge, II Additional Family Court Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL RC No. 1286 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 SHAMIM AHMED, J. rli CRL RC No. 1286 of 2026 08-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis