Disposed¶46

Adikarla Satya Ashok Kumar, W.G.Dt., v. Adikarla Pushpa Kumari, E.G.Dt.,& 3 Othrs., Rep Pp.

Andhra Pradesh HC4 May 2025CRLRC/1635/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court Amaravati; CRLRC No.1635 of 2012; Dr Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao; decided 05/05/2025; revision under S.397/401 Cr.PC against maintenance order dated 05-07-2012 in M.C.No.45 of 2008, IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada; matrimonial dispute settled between Adikarla Satya Ashok Kumar and Adikarla Pushpa Kumari; Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) paid; divorce in F.C.O.P.No.857 of 2017 dated 10.02.2018, Family Court Visakhapatnam; disposed of as compromised; no costs; interlocutory applications closed.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Revision Case disposed of as compromised; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand closed. ¶46

Adikarla Satya Ashok Kumar, W.G.Dt., Vs Adikarla Pushpa Kumari, E.G.Dt.,& 3 Othrs., Rep Pp. — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶6

CRIMINALREVISIONCASE NO: 1635 OF 2012

¶7

Between:

¶8

Adikarla Satya Ashok Kumar, S/o.Narayanarao, aged 44 years, Hindu Male, Agriculture, R/o.Thimmapuram, Dwarakanagar, Tirumala^Mandal West Godavari District.

¶9

...Petitioner/Respondent

¶10

AND

¶11

Adikarla Pushpa Kumari, W/o.Ashok Kumar, aged 35 years, Hindu, Female, Housewife, R/o.D.No.17-8-38/4, Revenue Colony, Sanjay Nagar, Kakinada, East Godavari District.

¶12

Adikarla Naga Venkata Jaswanth, S/o.Ashok Kumar, aged 11 years, Hindu, Male, R/o.D.No. 17-8-38/4, Revenue Colony, Sanjay Nagar, Kakinada, East Godavari District.

¶13

Adikarla Chandra Sai Teja, S/o.Ashok Kumar, aged 10 years, Hindu, Male,R/o.D.No. 17-8-38/4, Revenue Colony, Sanjay Nagar, Kakinada, East Godavari District.

¶14

(Being minor, represented by their mother/Guardian the 1 St respondent)

¶15

The State, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court^ofA.P.

¶16

...Respondents/Petitioners

¶17

Revision filed under Section 397 read with Section⁴⁰¹ of Cr.PC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filedinsupportofthe} Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records from the file of the IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada in M.C.No.45 of 2008, dated 05-07-2012, examine^thesameand set-a-side the Order.

¶18

Counsel for Petitioner :Sri P.Mohan Rao (Legal Aid Counsel)

¶19

Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3:Sri K.Srinivasa Reddy

¶20

Counsel for Respondent No.3: Assistant Public Prosecutor

¶21

The Court made the following:

[3521]

APHC010230352012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶26

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶27

MONDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶28

PRESENT

¶29

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶30

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1635/2012

¶31

Between:

¶32

Adikarla Satya Ashok Kumar, W.G.dt.

¶33

...PETITIONER

¶34

AND

¶35

Adikarla Pushpa Kumari, E.G.District and 3 Others Rep^PP ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶36

and Others

¶37

Counsel for the Petitioner;

¶38

1.P MOHAN RAO

¶39

LEGAL AID

¶40

Counsel for the Respondent(S);

¶41

1 .PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶42

2.K SRINIVASA REDDY

¶43

The Court made the following:

¶44

ORDER:

¶45

Heard Sri P.Mohan Rao, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 2. The Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Rajamahendravaram East Godavari District, submitted a report stating that the petitioner and respondent No.1 have settled their dispute and the petitioner paid Rs.10,00,000/(Rupees Ten Lakhs) to the respondent No.1 and got divorce from Family Court, Visakhapatnam, vide F.C.O.P.No.857 of 2017 dated 10.02.2018.

¶46

In view of the settlement of the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No.1, this revision case can be disposed of as compromised. 4. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is disposed of as compromised. No order as to costs.

¶47

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. /

¶48

To.

¶49

Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SE N OFFICER

¶50