Disposed

Vempati Ranjith Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Nov 2021CRLRC/102/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CR revision dismissed; court granted six months' time for arrears payment and directed quick disposal of main maintenance suit on merits, leaving final quantum open. Obligations to pay interim maintenance continued.

What did the court decide?

Time granted to pay arrears of maintenance within six months; disposal of main case directed on merits within six months; interim maintenance to continue.

Vempati Ranjith Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Maintenance and Alimony | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

I/ONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF NOVEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR, JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶6

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1 02 0F 2021

¶7

Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C aggrieved by the Order made in Clr.M.P.No.125 of 2019 in M.C. No.33 of 2019, dated. 14.08.2020 on the file of the Court of the Judge, Family Court-cum-Vl additional District and Sessions Judge, at Khammam.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Vempati Ranjith Kumar, S/o. Rajeshwar Rao, age 34 years, Occ. Executive Engineer, GKOC Kothagudem, R/o.H.No.7-1-274, Adershnagar, Manugur, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, Presently Residing at Qtr.No.B-93, Rudrampur Area, Kothagudem Town, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶10

... Petitioner/Res pondent

¶11

AND

¶12

I The State of Telangana, represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court Buildings, at Hyderabad.

¶13

) Chamkuri Radha @ Vempati Radha Charnalcuri, W/o.Vempati Ran.jith Kumar, D/o.Chamakuri Nageshwar Rao, Age 28 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o.H .No.1-3141 Cl 1, Saradhinagar, Near Mekala Narayana Board, Khammam City and District.

¶14

...Respondents/Petitioner

¶15

lA NO: 2 OF 2021

¶16

Petition under Section 397 (1) of Read with 482 Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the execution of warrant of arrest passed in docket order dated 21-1-2021 in Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2021 in 1.A.No.125 of 2019 in M.C.No.33 of 2019 on the file of the Judge, Family Court-cum-Vl Additional District and Sessions Judge at Khammam, pending disposal of the above Crl.R.C.,

¶17

lA NO: 3 OF 202'l

¶18

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in 1.A.No.125 o'f 2019 in M.C.No.33 of 2019 on the file of the Judge, Family Court cum-Vl Additional District and Sessions Judge at Khammam dated 14-8-2020 pending disposal of the above Crl.R.C., in the interest of^justice.

¶19

lA NO:4 OF 2021

¶20

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to extend the time in deposing the amount by the petitioner pursuant to the order, dated: 2410212021 passed in l. A. No.3 oI 2021 in Crl.RC. No,102 of 2021 .

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PAPAIAH PEDDAKULA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG)

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: M/s SHAIK MADAR

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON.BLE^{DT. ]USTICESHAMEEMAKTHER} CR MINA^{L REVSIONCASE} o.1O oF2 2L

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Criminal Revision^{Case, underSections397 and 401} of the Code of^{Criminal Procedure, t973 (for short,'Cr'P'C')is} filed by the^{petitioner/husband challenging the order'dated} 14.08.2020,^{passedin Crl.M.P.No;125of 2019 in M'C'No'33 of} 2019 by the learned^{ludge, FamilyCourt - cum - VI Additional} DistrictandSessionsJudge,Khammam,whereby'theCourt below directed the^{petitioner/husbandtopay asum of} Rs.25,000/-^{per month towardsinterimmaintenance to the} respondent No.2/wife^{on or before 1Oth of every month from the} date of the^{petitiontill the dlsposal of the main case, by directly} depositing^{into the account of respondent/wifeto be furnished to} him.TheCourtbelowalsodirectedthepetitioner/husbandtopay the arrears^{within two months from the date of the order'}

¶28

Heardthelearnedcounselforpetitioner/husband'learned Assistant Public^{Prosecutor appearingfor the respondent} No.l/State,^{learned counsel for the respondentNo'2/wifeand} perused the record.

¶29

3.Boththelearnedcounselforthepetitioner/husbandand thelearnedcounselfortherespondentNo'2/wifehaveconceded that in terms^{of the impugnedorder,dated 14 0B'2020'passed} inCrl,]tt.B"No.l25of2019inM.C.No.33of2019bythelearned

¶30

Dr.SA.J Crl.R.C.No.102 of 2021

¶31

¶32

ludge, Family Court - cum -^{VI Additional District and Sessions} Judge, Khammam, the^{petitioner/husbandhas been depositing} interim maintenance as ordered at the^{rate of Rs.25,000/- per} month. Both the counsel have also^{concededthat no orders} need be^passed on merits in this revision case.^However, learned counsel for the^{petitioner/husband requested} the^Court to grant some time to^pay the arrears of^malntenance.

¶33

Under these circumstances, no opinion^is expressed^{by this} Court on merits with regard to determination^{of grant} of^interim maintenance by the Court below. The Court below^{is directed to} dispose of the subject M.C,No.33 of 2019 filed by the respondent No.2/wife, on merits, in accordance with law, within a^period of six (6) months from today, not being influenced by the impugned order, dated 74.08.2020, passed in Crl.M.P.No.125 of 2019 in M.C.No.33 of 2019 by it. Further, in view of the request made on behalf of the petitioner/husband, the petitioner/ husband is directed to pay the arrears of maintenance due as on today within a period of six (6) months from today. Further, the petitioner/husband shall continue to pay the interim maintenance at Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) per month to the respondent No.2/wife by 1Oth of every calendar month. At this stage, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the respondent No.2/wife has got plenty of properties and is deriving income from different sources. This aspect is also left open to the Court below to decide on merits.

¶34

Dr.SA.J Crl.R.C.No.l02 of 2021

With the above observations and directions, the Criminal

¶39

Revision Case is disposed of.

¶40

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal

¶41

Revision Case shall stand closed.

¶42

SD/.C.V.MALLIKARJUNA^VARMA DEPUTY REGISTRAR sEcloN Vrcr*^</sup>

¶43

,TRUE COPY//

¶44

To, 1. The Judge,^{Family Court-cum-Vl Additional District and Sessions Judge' at} Khammam.^{(with records if anY)}

¶45

Two CCs to^{the puOf6 pioseci,ior,HighCourt for the State of Telangana'at} Hyderabad [OUTI

¶46

s. O'n" CC to^{Sri papaian Peddakula' Advocate [OPUC]}

¶47

;. o;; cc^{to ul. Shaik Madar,Advocate loPucl}

¶48

Two CD^CoPies

¶49

One Spare^CoPY

MMK

HIGH COURT

DATED:011'1112021

ORDER

CRLRC.No.102 ol 2021

H e
(
o.)
O 0 7 DEC 20?l
* *
PITC

¶57

DISPOSING OF'IHE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE

¶58

)

Vempati Ranjith Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vempati Ranjith Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mulkalapalli Nagaraju Vs The State of Telangana

Ch. Somnath Vs The State of Telangana

Rajupalem Murali Mohan Vs The State of Telangana

Cholleti Srinivas Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Lethakari Swarupa and 3 others Vs The State of Telanana and another

Palloju Venkateshwarlu Vs The State of Telanagana, And Another