Shivaraj Kumar C v. Smt. Divya Shree. D

Karnataka HC13 Oct 2025CRL.RP/1510/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; CRL.RP No. 1510 of 2025; interim maintenance ex parte order Rs.10,000/- p.m.; FLW for non-appearance; S. 144 BNSS maintenance petition; S. 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. revision; Rajnesh v. Neha guidelines not followed; summons unserved due to incomplete address; RPAD notice returned unclaimed; liberty to seek modification/recall before Trial Court; II Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC Malur; CMC No.166/2025; disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Revision Petition disposed of with observations; petitioner left free to appear before the Trial Court and file an application for modification or recall of the impugned orders; no interference with the impugned orders. ¶37-38

Shivaraj Kumar C Vs Smt. Divya Shree. D — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37-38

Issue for consideration

Whether the ex parte order dated 25.06.2025 directing payment of interim maintenance warrants interference on the ground that the guidelines in Rajnesh v. Neha were not followed by the Trial Court. +1 more

¶26

Court's answer

As in Crl.R.P.No.1254/2025, the petitioner has liberty to move an application before the Trial Court itself for modification of the ex parte interim maintenance order; the Court did not itself interfere with the order dated 25.06.2025.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

Since the FLW (issued after RPAD notice returned unclaimed) is returnable by 15.11.2025 and there is sufficient time, the appropriate course is for the petitioner to appear before the Trial Court and file an application for modification or recall of the impugned orders; the Court did not set aside the FLW.

¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision Petition under S. 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. challenging (i) an ex parte order dated 25.06.2025 directing the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month and (ii) an order dated 27.09.2025 issuing FLW against the petitioner for non-appearance, both passed by the II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Malur in CMC No.166/2025, arising from the respondent's petition under Section 144 of BNSS. Petitioner contended that the guidelines in Rajnesh v. Neha and Another, (2021) 2 SCC 324, were not followed and that summons went unserved owing to an incomplete address. Held: as in Crl.R.P.No.1254/2025 (disposed of on 22.08.2025), the petitioner has liberty to move the Trial Court itself for modification; since the FLW, issued after the RPAD notice returned unclaimed, is returnable by 15.11.2025 and sufficient time remains, the petitioner should appear before the Trial Court and file an application for modification or recall. Revision Petition disposed of.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:40253 CRL.RP No. 1510 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1510 OF 2025

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHIVARAJ KUMAR C S/O LATE CHIKKAVENKATARAMANAPPA. AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT KARIM SONNENA HALLI (ANJANA MURTHY NAGAR), MADHURE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK - 561 203 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. NARESH KUMAR P.C, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SMT. DIVYA SHREE. D W/O SHIVARAJ KUMAR C C/O DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEAR GANDI CIRCLE, PATTALAMMA BADAVANE, MALURU TOWN, KOLARA DISTRICT - 563 130.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.06.2025 AND ORDER OF FLW DATED 27.09.2025 PASSED

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:40253 CRL.RP No. 1510 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

BY THE II ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MALUR IN CMC NO.166/2025 AT ANNEXURE-A.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Challenging order dated 25.06.2025 an ex parte order directing petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/per month and order dated 27.09.2025 issuing FLW against petitioner for non-appearance.

¶25

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted, insofar as order dated 25.06.2025, this Court in Crl.R.P.no.1254/2025 disposed of on 22.08.2025 had permitted petitioner therein to move an application before Trial Court for modification of order and directed Trial Court to pass orders, taking note of guidelines issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rajnesh v. Neha and Another reported in (2021)2 Supreme Court

¶26

Cases 324. As guidelines were not followed, impugned order would warrant interference. Insofar as order dated 27.09.2025, it was submitted that petitioner's address

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40253 CRL.RP No. 1510 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

mentioned in petition filed by respondent under Section 144 of BNSS was incomplete and therefore, summons was not served. Consequently, in absence of proper service of summons, order issuing FLW would be contrary to law and seeks for setting aside of same.

¶30

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and perused material available on record.

¶31

A perusal of order relied upon would indicate that in a Revision Petition filed against an ex parte order of interim maintenance, this Court had permitted petitioner to move an application before Trial Court itself for modification. Even in instant matter, petitioner would have such liberty.

¶32

Even insofar as order dated 27.09.2025 it is seen

¶33

that on notice issued by RPAD returning as unclaimed, Trial Court issued FLW to respondent. Same as returnable by 15.11.2025. Since there is sufficient time, it would only be appropriate for petitioner to appear before Trial Court and file application for modification or recall of impugned orders.

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:40253 CRL.RP No. 1510 of 2025

¶35

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37