Dismissed¶37

Guggila Srinivasa Rao, Prakasam Dt., v. Guggilla Sujatha, Prakasam & 2 Otrs, Rep Pp.

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Nov 2025CRLRC/1518/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court, Amaravati (T MALLIKARJUNA RAO, J.), CRL.R.C.NO.1518 OF 2017, decided 06.11.2025: husband's revision under Ss.397/401 CrPC against interim maintenance order dated 24.11.2016 in Crl.M.P.No.150 of 2016 in M.C.No.4 of 2016 (Family Court-cum-VIII ADJ, Ongole; Rs.5,000/- wife, Rs.2,000/- minor daughter) dismissed as infructuous, no costs, since M.C.No.4 of 2016 was disposed of on 31.10.2023 granting Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/-; miscellaneous petitions closed. No precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

Since M.C.No.4 of 2016 stood disposed of on 31.10.2023 (with maintenance of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/- granted to the two petitioners therein), the cause in the present Criminal Revision Case does not survive. ¶36

Guggila Srinivasa Rao, Prakasam Dt., Vs Guggilla Sujatha, Prakasam & 2 Otrs, Rep Pp. — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

APHC010377862017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3369]

¶5

THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶8

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1518/2017

¶9

Between:

¶10

GUGGILA SRINIVASA RAO, PRAKASAM DT.,, S/O.BASAVAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O.RARNAYAPALEM VILLAGE, ADDANKI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

GUGGILLA SUJATHA PRAKASAM 2 OTRS REP PP, W/O.SRINIVASA RAO, AGED 38 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.32-132, VENUGOPALA SWAMY STREET, KUMMARIPALEM, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶14

GUGGILLA KAVYA, D/O. SRINIVASA RAO,AGED 12 YEARS, BEING MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER, R/O.D.NO.32-1-32, VENUGOPALA SWAMY STREET, KUMMARIPALEM, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶15

THE STATE OF A P, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT HYDERABAD.

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

¶18

TMR,J CRL.R.C.NO.1518 OF 2017

¶19

Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased toto file the present revision against the Order passed in CrI.M.P.No. 150 of 2016 in M.C.No. 4 OF 2016 dated 24-11-2016, before the Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District Judge:Ongole, for the following grounds among other:

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLRCMP 2456 OF 2017

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 83 days in representation of the above CRL.R.C.Sr. 7931 of 2017 and pass such other or further order or orders as deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶22

IA NO: 2 OF 2017(CRLRCMP 2457 OF 2017

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the in Order passed in Crl.M.P.No. 150 of 2016 in M.C.No. 4 OF 2016 dated 24-11-2016, before the Judge, Family Court-CumVIII Additional District Judge, Ongole, pending disposal of the above revision case, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.MADHAVA RAO NALLURI

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.KAUSHIK KUMBHAJADALA

¶28

2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶29

¶30

TMR,J CRL.R.C.NO.1518 OF 2017

¶31

The Court made the following Order:

¶32

This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the order dated 24.11.2016 in Crl.M.P.No.150 of 2016 in M.C.No.4 of 2016 on the file of Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole.

¶33

This petition was filed seeking interim maintenance, and

¶34

the trial Court allowed the petition by granting maintenance of amount Rs.5,000/- to the 1^st petitioner and Rs.2000/- to the 2^nd petitioner towards maintenance. Aggrieved by the said orders passed by the trial Court, the respondent/husband preferred this revision petition.

¶35

As per the case status available on the official website of the Prakasam District M.C. No.4 of 2016 was disposed of on 31.10.2023, allowing the petition by granting maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to the 1^st petitioner and Rs.5,000/- to the 2^nd petitioner.

¶36