Dismissed

Avadhutha Mahesh, , Uma Mahesh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Jun 2023CRLRC/1727/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the criminal revision filed by the husband under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. The Bench found no infirmity in the lower courts' decision granting maintenance and restraint to the wife based on evidence of harassment and neglect. Relief is denied.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision case is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions pending are stood closed.

Avadhutha Mahesh, , Uma Mahesh Vs The State of… — Maintenance and Alimony | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁵¹ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JUNE TWO IHOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶6

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO:^'1727 OF 2018

¶7

Criminal Revision Case Under Sections 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. against the Judgment dated 07.02.2018 made in Crl A.No.1'1 1 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam^preferred against the Order^{passed in} D V.C.No.18 oI 2013, dated 30 01.2017 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam

¶8

Between:

¶9

Avadhutha Mahesh, @ Uma Mahesh, Occ Computer Operator, R/o. Flot No. 912' H M T Colony' Miyapur' Hyderabad

¶10

...AccusED/pErrrroNER

¶11

AND

¶12

'l . The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, Hrgh Court Buildings High Court of Hyderabad, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 Smt Avadutha Srilatha, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H.No, 7-1-41A, Near Venkatagiri Gate, Khammam Town and District.

¶14

Avadhuta Hemnesh, being minor rep., by his Mother and natural Guardian smt A Srilatha - 2nd Respondent herein

¶15

...RES'.NDENTS/..M,LA,NANT

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶17

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To stay the operation of the order in D.V.C. No. 18 of 2013 dated 3O.O 2017 on the file of the I Additional lvlagistrate of I Class, Khammam as modified in Crl. A. No. 1 1 1 ot 2017 dated 07 .02.2018 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge at Khammam.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D. V. CHALAPATHI RAO

¶19

Counsel for Respondent No. 1: THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶20

Counsel for Respondent No.2: Dr. CHALLA SRINIVAS REDDY

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

I II

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI ]USTICE K.SURENDER

¶25

CRIMINAL REVTSI ON CASE No.L727 F 2018

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Crirninal Revision is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the Judgment dated 07.02.2018 passed in Criminai Appeal No.111 of 2017 by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam whereby the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the';udgment of the learned I Additional ludicial Magistrate of I Class, Khammam passed in D.V.C.No.18 of 2013.

¶28

The learned Magistrate after examining the wife and another on her behalf as PWs.1 and 2 and also examined husband as RW.1 during course of trial and marked exhibits R1 to Rl1 found thatthe wife is entitled to maintenance and also restraint orders. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge concurred with the findings of the learned Magtstrate.

¶29

Having gone through the order, I do not find any infirmity in granting maintenance since the Court found on the basis of evidence that the wife was harassed and she was neglected.

¶30

¶31

I l i

¶32

Accordingly, there^{are no grounds to interferewith the orders of}

¶33

the learned Sessions^Judge.

¶34

Accordingly, the^{CriminalRevisionCase is dismissed'}

¶35

Needless to say,^{the wife and child can approachthe trial Court}

¶36

seeking enhancement^{of the maintenance.}

¶37

Miscellaneous^{Petitions, pendingif any, shall stand closed}

¶38

Sd/. M. RAMANA^KRISHNA DEPUTY^REGISTRAR //TRUE^COPY//

¶39

SECTI FFICER

¶40

To, 1 The PrinciDal Sessions Judge, Khammam

¶41

z. tne t Addiiional^{Judicial Maqistrate of First Class' Khammam} 5, i;; Ca;ti,^{tne puoric Pros6cutor,HighCourtfor the Stateof Telangana} 4. 8#'J" to Sri^{D v chalapathiRao Advocate 1oPg^cl.} .^. 5. One CC to^{Dr. Challa Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate(OPUU)} 6. Two CD^CoPies

v,*

HIGH COURT

KS,J

DATED: 2110612023

trrE Sr4fl:
o
7
t.,
,12 IUtj ?m
i: tt'
< ,'/
', ,,,,?

¶48

ORDER

¶49

CRLRC.No.1727 of 2018

¶50

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE

¶51

<br>\ L
\o \ri
e(-

Avadhutha Mahesh, , Uma Mahesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avadhutha Mahesh, , Uma Mahesh 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

S.Sainath Vs S.Sandhya Rani

K.Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

K.Shankar Vs the State of a.P., Acb, Karimnagar

Ajay Joshi, Vs The State of Telangana

Sandepaka Veeraswamy Vs the State of A.P. and 2 Others

Sandepaka Jeevanjyothi Vs The State of Telangana