The High Court dismissed the criminal revision filed by a husband to set aside an interim maintenance order. The Court held the revision was not maintainable citing a prior precedent stating such revisions are barred under Section 397(2) of Cr.P.C.
The Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[32ee ]
\
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY ,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENIY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1927 OF 2013
Crlminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the Order dated 11.07.2013 passed in Crl.MP.No. 577 of 2013 in MC.No. 209 of 201 1 on the file of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the Trial of JHCBBC cum Additional Family Court cum XXlll Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad.
Between:
Mohd Riyazuddin, S/o. Ivlohd Salahuddin, Age: 32 years, Occ Driver, Rl/o. 193-543128, Shama Talkies Ali Nagar, Jahanuma, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(CRLRCMP. NO: 2957 OF 2013)
Petition under Section 482 oI 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 all further proceedings pursuant to the order dated 11.O7.2013 in Crl.MP.No.577 of 2013 in MC.No.209 ol 2011 on the file of the learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad at Nampally
Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms. NASEEB AFSHAN
Counsel for Respondent No.2 : ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Counsel for Respondent No.1 : None appeared
The.Court made the following: ORDER
I{ON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENI'(;OI'AL
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No 1927 of 2Ol3
ORDER:
1 This C-iminal Revision Case is filed by the Jrelitioner to set aside the order dated 11.O7.2O13 passed in Crl.M.P. No.577 ol 2013 in M.O. No.2O9 of 2011 on the f,rle o[ Ad,ll. Metropolitan Sessions Jurlge for the Trial of JHCBBC-curn-Adc.1. Family Court cum-XXIII Aldl. Chief Judge, Hyderabad whereir the trial Court directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs;.2OO )/ - to the respondent tcwards maintenance from 01.07 2013 tiU the disposal of M-C. No.2t)9 of 2011.
I'age 2 ol4
with a demand to bring additional dowry and used to beat her indiscriminately and necked her out of his house. Thereafter the petitioner/respondent No.1 filed a petition to grant interim maintenance from the respondent/ petitioner. Considering the submissions made by both parties, the learned Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the trial of JHCBBC cum-Addl. Family Courtcum-XXIII Addl. Chief Judge, Hyderabad passed order dated 11.07.2013 in Crl.M.P.No.577 of 2O13 in M.C.No.209 of 2011 granting an amount of Rs.2000/- per month towards interim maintenance to the petitioner/un-official respondent No.1 till the disposal of the main M.C. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Criminal Revision Case is {iled.
I'agc 3 of4
maintainabl(, against an interim order- grirnting interim maintenancc in the light of Section 397 (21 of Cr.P.rl.
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall slan,l closed.
\
//TRUE COPY'
S;d,.I. NAGA LAKSHMI D =PI,TY REGISTRAR
L
SE N OFFICER
To,
Njb
I
t
t,
HIGH COURT
DATED:26106!2023
ORDER
.1 e. 1;r'Al.t
<:l
c
I -) 1l r;6t N8
')
\ ."v eu,
-: tJ
':/?
CRLRC.N0.1927 of 2013
DISMISSING THE CRLRC.
@).rtu L"t.-.qAr'
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a criminal revision is maintainable against an interim order granting maintenance.
Whether the criminal revision filed to set aside the interim maintenance order is covered by the order dated 27.04.2022 in Criminal Revision Case (SR) No.3198 of 2022.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohd Riyazuddin
Nasreen Fatima
The State of Andhra Pradesh
E.V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
