Kandula Chandra Obula Reddy alias Nani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

KANDULA CHANDRA OBULA REDDY ALIAS NANI, S/O LATE KANDULA SIVANANDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC MANAGING DIRECTOR, R/O FLAT NO.602, 6TH FLOOR, KANDULA RESIDENCYRAJA REDDY STREET, KADAPA CITY, YSR DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTORHIGH COURT OF AP, AMARAVATI

¶13

KANDULA VEERA SWETHA, W/O.KANDULA CHANDRA OBULA REDDYAGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCHOUSEWIFER/O.FLAT NO.203, ROAD NO.20, OM SHANTHI NAGARKADAPA, YSR DISTRICT

¶14

KANDULA TRIVIKRAM REDDY, S/O.KANDULA CHANDRA OBULA REDDYAGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, R/O.FLAT NO.203,ROAD NO.20, OM SHANTHI NAGARKADAPA, YSR DISTRICT

¶15

KANDULA YATHARTHA REDDY, S/O.KANDULA CHANDRA OBULA REDDYAGED ABOUT 6 YEARS, R/O.FLAT NO.203ROAD NO.20, OM SHANTHI NAGARKADAPA, YSR DISTRICT

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to Petitioner beg to present this

¶18

2

¶19

Memorandum of Criminal Revision against the Order dated 30.01.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.32 of 2024 in M.C.No.31 of 2023 by the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kadapa

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶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 may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Order dated 30.01.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.32 of 2024 in M.C.No.31 of 2023 on the file of the learned Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kadapa, pending final adjudication of the present Criminal Revision Case and pass such

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.M/S INDUS LAW FIRM

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶26

3

¶27

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 259/2026

¶28

JUDGMENT:

¶29

The present Criminal Revision was preferred challenging the order dated 30.01.2026 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kadapa in Crl.M.P.No.32 of 2024 in MC.No.31 of 2023, granting interim maintenance @Rs.1,00,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 and @ Rs.50,000/- per month each to the respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

¶30

Heard Sri V.R.N.Prashanth, learned counsel representing M/s. Indus Law Firm for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State.

¶31

The petitioner herein is the husband, and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are his wife and children respectively. Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 filed M.C. No. 31 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kadapa, wherein, they filed Crl.M.P. No.32 of 2024 seeking interim maintenance, which was partly allowed vide order dated 30.01.2026. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has preferred the present revision.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the interim maintenance granted by the learned Trial Court is on the higher side. The learned Judge failed to consider the substantial recurring expenses and the existing financial liabilities borne by the petitioner.

¶33

4

¶34

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders, as the impugned order pertains only to interim maintenance and the main case is still pending.

¶35

Considering the submissions made, since this revision is preferred challenging the order dated 30.01.2026 granting interim maintenance to the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein, it is apposite to dispose of the present revision without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties with a direction to the learned Trial Judge to dispose of the main MC.No.31 of 2023, on the file of the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kadapa, as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournment in a causal way by mere asking, preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, without being influenced by the order of this Court. Registry is directed to communicate the order forthwith.

¶36