HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Criminal Petition No.15098 of 2013 Date: 05-6-2014 Between Alluri Someswara Rao … Petitioner/ Respondent and A.Rama Devi and 2 others … Respondents/ Petitioners The State of A.P., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad … Respondent HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Criminal Petition No.15098 of 2013 Order:
The petition is laid by the sole respondent in M.C.No.5 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Special Mobile Court), Eluru, West Godavari District. Respondents 1 to 3 herein are the petitioners in M.C.No.5 of 2009. The 1st respondent is the wife of the petitioner. Respondents 2 and 3 are their minor children.
The 1st respondent filed M.C.No.5 of 2009 seeking maintenance at Rs.3,000/- per month for the 1st respondent and at Rs.2,000/- per month for each of respondents 2 and 3. After recording evidence, the learned Trial Judge awarded maintenance at Rs.1,000/- per month in favour of the 1st respondent and at Rs.500/- each per month in favour of respondents 2 and 3 from the date of the order in M.C.No.5 of 2009. Questioning the same, the husband preferred Criminal Revision Petition No.37 of 2011 before the VII Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the revision. Hence, the present petition.
2. It is contended by the husband that the 1st respondent-wife deserted the petitioner-husband, so much so, she is not entitled to maintenance.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the petitioner, who has been working as a Lecturer, deliberately suppressed the same and described himself to be an agricultural labourer in O.P.No.45 of 2009. Assuming that the petitioner herein is a Lecturer but deliberately described himself as an agricultural labourer in O.P.No.45 of 2009, it does not affect the result of the present case in any manner.
4. The petitioner-husband filed O.P.No.45 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Eluru seeking for divorce on the ground of desertion.
On 01-02-2011, O.P.No.45 of 2009 was decreed granting divorce to the petitioner-husband. The 1st respondent- wife filed C.C.No.202 of 2009 alleging that the husband committed an offence under Section 498-A, IPC. Admittedly, C.C.No.202 of 2009 ended in acquittal. While so, the wife preferred M.C.No.5 of 2009 and obtained orders of maintenance at Rs.1,000/- per month in her favour and at Rs.500/- per month in favour of each of respondents 2 and 3. The husband preferred criminal revision therefrom unsuccessfully. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in O.P.No.45 of 2009, the Court held that the wife deserted the husband voluntarily. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a finding by a Civil Court would bind the Criminal Court in respect of the same dispute. I am afraid that neither the Trial Court nor the Revisional Court could have taken a different view regarding the voluntary desertion by the 1st respondent-wife. In any event, now evidently the decree in O.P.No.45 of 2009 holds sway wherein it was held that the 1st respondent herein deserted the petitioner.
5. I have no option but to accept the finding of the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Eluru that the 1st respondent-wife deserted the petitioner-husband. Section 125(4) Cr.P.C contemplates that if a wife is staying away from the husband without sufficient reason, she would not be entitled to receive any allowance towards maintenance. Where the competent Civil Court held that the 1st respondent-wife voluntarily deserted the petitioner-husband, I am afraid that the 1st respondent- wife is not entitled to any maintenance from the petitioner- husband. So far as the respondents 2 and 3 are concerned, there would not appear to be any dispute regarding their entitlement for maintenance and the quantum of maintenance awarded in their favour.
6. Consequently, this petition is allowed in part. The maintenance at Rs.1,000/- per month awarded in favour of the 1st respondent-wife by the Trial Court and confirmed by the Revisional Court is found to be devoid of merits and is accordingly set aside. The award of maintenance in favour of respondents 2 and 3 at Rs.500/- per month each from the date of the orders in M.C.No.5 of 2009 is hereby confirmed.
The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this petition shall stand closed.
Dr. K.G.SHANKAR, J.
05th June, 2014. Ak HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Criminal Petition No.15098 of 2013 05th June, 2014. (Ak)