K. VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is filed to set aside the order, dated 11.06.2013 passed in M.C.No.20 of 2011 on the file of the Court of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla, Guntur District, whereby, 2nd respondent being the wife and 3rd respondent being the daughter of the revision petitioner were awarded maintenance in M.C.No.20 of 2011.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner, and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for 1st respondent / State.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the revision petitioner and the 2nd respondent was performed on 19.4.2004 and their marriage has been consummated and they lead happy marital life for some time, out of their wedlock, they were blessed with 3rd respondent. At the time of marriage, the parents of the 2nd respondent presented certain amount of cash, gold and household articles to the respondent. Having been not satisfied with the said dowry, revision petitioner started harassing the 2nd respondent both physically and mentally by demanding additional dowry. As 2nd respondent did not choose to pay the additional amount, finally, he deserted them. Thereafter, he filed H.M.O.P.No.169 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet for restitution of conjugal rights with false and frivolous allegations. In the meantime, mediation took place and they compromised before the Lok Adalat. Again, on 20.1.2009, revision petitioner left the petitioners at her parents' house and deserted them. Though, the parents of 2nd respondent raised several mediations for their re-union, revision petitioner did not choose to join them. As such, 2nd respondent filed D.V.C.No.3 of 2009 before the Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Prohibition and Excise, Guntur seeking permission to reside along with the revision petitioner. Subsequently, revision petitioner filed H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2011 before the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur seeking divorce. As they are unable to maintain themselves, they filed the above said maintenance case under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') before the trial Court claiming maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to the 2nd respondent and Rs.4,000/- to the 3rd respondent per month from the revision petitioner alleging that they were neglected by the revision petitioner and they have no means to maintain themselves. The respondent is working as a Salesman in cloth showroom and earning salary of Rs.12,000/- besides having immovable properties.