Boomardhi Vikas Kumar, Hyderabad., v. Smt.B.Swarna Latha, Hyd And ANR, Rep Pp.,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2630 of 2017 ORDER:

The present Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 & 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, requesting to set aside the order dated 09.01.2017 in Crl.M.P.No.1480 of 2016 in M.C.No.171 of 2016 passed by the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the Trial of Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Case-cum-Additional Family Court-cum-IX Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder, interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month was granted till disposal of M.C.

Sri T.V. Ramesh, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, would submit that the court below failed to notice that the 1st respondent - wife is working as a ladies tailor earning Rs.10,000/- per month, besides getting rents; that there is no chance of begetting any children to her and that the petitioner never necked her out and, therefore, sought to set aside the order under challenge. The Additional Judge, Family Court, taking into consideration that the revision petitioner is working as a videographer and it is his obligation to provide minimum necessities to his legitimate wife, awarded Rs.5,000/- per month towards interim maintenance. It is no doubt true, certain documents are filed, but they are to be examined on marking as exhibits by holding a full-fledged trial in the M.C. The earnings of the 1st respondent also requires to be

examined during trial and mere photostat copy of the sale deed filed by the revision petitioner is no ground to hold that the 1st respondent is deriving rents. Be that as it may, when kept in view, the current cost of essential commodities and the present day price index number, certainly, it cannot be said that the amount of Rs.5,000/- per month awarded towards interim maintenance is excessive. There is no merit in the present petition.

Hence, the present Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. However, since the Maintenance Case relates to the year 2016, the learned Additional Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, is directed to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, not later than six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the present revision case, stand closed.

___________________________ A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J 30.11.2017 v v