Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 53308 (KAR)

MANJUNATH S/O. GUDDAPPA MADIWALAR v. SMT. ANNAPOORNA @ SHOBHA W/O. MANJUNATH MADIWALAR

CRL.P/100608/2021 · 2026-01-31

V Srishananda

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1307 CRL.P No. 100608 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100608 OF 2021 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MANJUNATH S/O. GUDDAPPA MADIWALAR AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. AUTO DRIVER, R/O. YALIWAL, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD-581207. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. H.N. GULARADDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. ANNAPOORNA @ SHOBHA W/O. MANJUNATH MADIWALAR AGE. 41 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. YALIWAL, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, NOW AT CHABBI, TQ. HUBBALLI- 581207. 2. SHANKAR S/O. MANJUNATH MADIWALAR AGE. 13 YEARS, OCC.STUDENT, R/O. YALIWAL, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, NOW AT CHABBI, TQ. HUBBALLI- 581207. 3. SAHANA D/O. MANJUNATH MADIWALAR AGE. 9 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. YALIWAL, TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD, NOW AT CHABBI, TQ. HUBBALLI- 581207. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE SERVED TO R1; R2 AND R3 ARE MINORE R/BY R1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT DATED 14.01.2020 OF THE I-ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2026.02.04 12:57:36 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1307 CRL.P No. 100608 of 2021 DHARWAD, SITTING AT HUBBALLI, PASSED IN CRL.REVISION PETITION NO.137/2018 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Sri. H. N. Gularaddi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband who is now residing with the wife and therefore, order of maintenance needs to be set aside. 2. Whether the parties are living together or not cannot be ascertained as the respondent served with the notice and remained absent. 3. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. 4. However, if there are any coercive steps taken in respect of the maintenance order, the petitioner may renew his request for passing appropriate orders. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SMM CT:CMU LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 7