A SREENIVASA RAO Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is no representation for the 2nd Respondent-wife. The Petitioners are Accused Nos. 1 to 5 in D.V.A. No. 18 of 2007 on the file of the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The 1st accused is/was the husband of the 2nd Respondent. Alleging that A-1 to A-5 committed matrimonial offences, the 2nd Respondent/wife laid D.V.A. No. 18 of 2007.

(2.) As there is prior litigation between the parties, the 2nd Respondent laid M.C. No. 175 of 2003 seeking for maintenance from the 1st Petitioner herein. She was indeed successful in obtaining an order from the Court granting maintenance in her favour. It would appear that the order has become final.

(3.) While so, the 2nd Respondent laid C.C. No. 226 of 2003 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court), Hyderabad. She made allegations against the Petitioner herein in C.C. No. 226 of 2003 under Section 498-A and other matrimonial offences. The case had ended in acquittal. The judgment was pronounced on 30.4.2007.