[HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.3182 OF 2012 Dated 18-7-2014 Between:
Kurapati Madhusudhana Rao.
..Petitioner.
And:
The State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and others.
…Respondents.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.3182 OF 2012 ORDER:
This petition is filed to quash orders in Criminal Revision Petition No.63 of 2011 on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal, whereunder the orders in M.C.No.4 of 2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Allagadda is modified to the extent of quantum.
Present petition is filed by the husband contending that the learned Sessions Judge having found that there is no evidence to prove that petitioner has got immovable property or capacity to maintain himself as well as wife and son, granted maintenance of Rs.4,000/- to the wife and Rs.2,000/- to the son though there was no claim from the wife towards maintenance of the son. He further submitted that only on presumption both the courts assessed the income of the petitioner as he worked for sometime in U.S.A. as Software Engineer and that he is now an unemployee cannot be accepted and on that ground, maintenance is granted. He further submitted that wife though contended that petitioner herein has got several properties, she failed to prove the same and the courts below observed the same. He further submitted that petitioner is ready to take back his wife and that she on her own left his marital life and therefore, she is not entitled for maintenance. It is further submitted that petitioner has filed O.P. for restitution of conjugal rights and that petitioner is not keeping good health and he is not doing any job after his return from U.S.A. and he has no financial source to pay any maintenance and at best, he can pay maintenance only to son and he cannot pay maintenance that was awarded to the wife.
On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 submitted that petitioner has stated that petitioner has got huge properties which are referred in the judgment of the Sessions Court in para 2 and petitioner has not produced any evidence to show that he is no way concerned with those properties. He further submitted that the petitioner took insurance policy with premium of Rs.1,01,196/- and that shows the financial capacity and those aspects were considered by trial court and revisional court and that there are no grounds to interfere with the orders of courts below. He further submitted that husband is bound to maintain wife and son.
Now, the point that would arise for my consideration in this petition is that whether the orders in M.C.No.4 of 2009 and Crl.R.P.No.63 of 2011 can be quashed or not.
POINT:
I have perused the material papers filed along with quash petition including order in M.C.No.4 of 2009 and Crl.R.P.No.63 of 2011.
Both courts after considering the evidence of witnesses examined on behalf of wife and on behalf of respondent, found that petitioner is bound to maintain wife and son. The objection with regard to means of the petitioner was also considered by both the courts and taking that petitioner is an unemployee and got properties into consideration, a meager amount of Rs.6,000/- is granted against the claim of Rs.9,000/- by the trial court and the same is confirmed by III Additional Sessions Court but distributed it as Rs.4,000/- to the wife and Rs.2,000/- to the son.
As seen from the allegations in the petition, it is alleged that petitioner is getting a monthly income of Rs.1,50,000/- as Software Engineer at Bangalore besides owning several properties. Though the employment of the petitioner at Bangalore is not proved, the fact remains that he is maintaining himself all these years including payment of insurance premium.
Considering these aspects, I am of the view that both trial court and appellate court have rightly granted maintenance and that there are no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings.
For these reasons, this Criminal Petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.
As a sequel to the disposal of this Criminal petition, the Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending, shall stand dismissed.
JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR Dated 18-7-2014.
Dvs.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR Dvs CRIMINAL PETITION No.3182 OF 2012 Dated 18-7-2014