← Library
Madras High CourtCRL RC/629/2016allowed

Ghanamoorthy v. Rani

2016-06-21Honourable Mr Justice G. Chockalingam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.06.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM Crl.R.C.No.629 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.4384 of 2016 Ghanamoorthy ... Petitioner Vs.

1. Rani

2. Minor Deebiga (R.2 Rep. by first respondent/mother.

... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set aside the order dated 19.05.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, in M.C.No.3 of 2010, filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.

For Petitioner : Mr.L.Shrileka For Respondents: Mr.V.R.Appaswamee

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, in M.C.No.3 of 2010, dated 19.05.2015.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that the respondents 1 and 2 have filed a petition in M.C.No.3 of 2010 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, under Section 125 (1) (a) (b) of Cr.P.C., seeking maintenance from the revision petitioner. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, by order dated 19.05.2015 allowed the maintenance petition and directed the respondent therein/revision petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,500/- to the first respondent and a sum of Rs.1,000/- to the second respondent towards maintenance per month on or before 5th of every month from the date of petition. As against the said order, the present criminal revision case is filed by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner further contended that the revision petitioner has

filed a counter in the said maintenance petition and the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, without considering the objections raised in the counter, had erroneously passed the order without application of mind. It is further contended that the petitioner is not liable to pay any maintenance amount to the respondents, but the learned Judicial Magistrate, has failed to consider the above said aspect. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, may be set aside and this Criminal Revision Case may be allowed.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the learned trial Judge, after considering the entire materials on record, had correctly passed an order allowing the maintenance petition and hence, he prayed that the criminal revision case may be dismissed.

5. The order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, reads as follows:- "In the result, this petition is partly allowed, and the respondent is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,500/- to the 1st petitioner and Rs.1,000/- to the 2nd petitioner towards maintenance per month on or before 5th day of every month from the date of petition."

Except the above order, there was no fair order or any separate order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar. On a perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent in the maintenance petition/revision petitioner, it is seen that he has raised so many objections disputing the claim of the respondents for maintenance. The learned Magistrate, without considering the objections raised by the revision petitioner, had simply passed a non speaking order.

6. In view of the above facts and circumstances, since the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, is a non-speaking order, the said order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, in M.C.No.3 of 2010, on 19.05.2015, is set aside and this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the matter is remitted back to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, is directed to dispose of the case in M.C.No.3 of 2010, according to law, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Jrl

To The Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar.

+ 1 cc to Mr.V.R. Appaswamee, Advocate Sr.34650 Crl.R.C.No.629 of 2016 SKS(CO) EU 1.7.16