IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4437 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
J.R.Shankara Prasanna, S/o late A.S.Ramegowda, Aged about 40 years, R/at Ambalajeeralli, Bellur Hobli, Nagamangala Taluk – 571 432.
…Petitioner (By Sri.Bipin Hegde, Advocate) AND:
1. Smt.Hemalath K.N., W/o J.R.Shankara Prasanna, Aged about 32 years, 2. Master A.S.Yashas Gowda, S/o J.R.Shankara Prasanna, Aged about 13 years, 3. Master S.Sohan, S/o J.R.Shankara Prasanna, Aged about 8 years, Respondents 2 & 3 are being minors, Represented by their Natural Mother And guardian Smt.Hemalath K.N., R/at BDO Quarters, T.B.Extension, Nagamangala Town – 571 432.
4. Smt.Soubhagya, W/o late A.S.Ramegowda, Aged about 63 years, R/at Ambala Jeeralli, Bellur Hobli, Nagamangala Taluk – 571 432.
...Respondents (By Sri.H.K.Honnegowda, Advocate for R1 to R3 – Absent; R4 served - unrepresented) This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to (1)set aside the order dated 06.09.2014 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nagamangala in Crl.Misc.No.93/2013 as per Annexure – A (2) set aside the order dated 28.05.2015 passed by the Learned V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mandya in Criminal Appeal No.41/2014 as per Annexure-B and etc., This Criminal petition coming on for admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner has approached this Court against the concurrent orders of the Courts below directing the petitioner herein to pay a maintenance of `5,000/- each to respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. Undisputedly, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are in the care and custody of respondent No.1. Considering the fact that the petitioner has neglected to look after and maintain the respondents, the Courts below have directed the petitioner to pay maintenance to respondent Nos.2 and 3. Both the Courts below have taken into consideration the financial capacity of the petitioner to pay the said maintenance. The Courts below have held that the first respondent is doing Real Estate business at Nagamangala and earning `30,000/- per month.
Petitioner has not been able to point out any error of fact and law warranting interference by this Court. I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the impugned orders. Consequently, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE GH