Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1530/2025 of Gundu Sai Karthik, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 1 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1530/2025 Between: 1. GUNDU SAI KARTHIK,, S/O. LATE GUNDU
APHC010719722025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
Between:
1. GUNDU SAI KARTHIK,, S/O. LATE GUNDU RAMASHARMA, AGED
ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O. BOSTON
SCIENTIFIC
LIMITED,
CASHEL
ROAD,
CLONMEL
CITY,
TIPPERARY, IRELAND, REP. BY HIS GPA HOLDER SMT. GUNDU
SAVITHRI, W/O. LATE GUNDU RAMASHARM AGED ABOUT 59
YEARS R/O. D.NO. 24-106 JAYAVARAPU VARI STREET NEAR
SIVALAYAM R AGRAHARAM GUNTUR - 522003
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT
AMARAVATHI.
2. GUNDU SRINIVASA HIMA BINDU, W/O GUNDU SAI KARTHIK, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 23-7-28A, GIRIVEDHI, GANESH
ENCLAVE
APARTMENTS,
SATYANARAYANAPURAM,
VIJAYAWADA. KRISHNA DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records and set aside the Order dated 26.11.2025 passed in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.)
No. 1082 of 2024 on the file of the Hon’ble Principal Family Court -cum- IV
Addl. District Court, Vijayawada
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the order dated 26.11.2025 passed in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No. 1082 of 2024 on the file of the Hon’ble Principal Family Court -cum- IV Addl. District Court, Vijayawada, pending disposal of the above Criminal Revision Petition IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim stay granted on 05.01.2025 in I.A.NO.1 OF 2025 in CRL.R.C.NO.1530 OF 2025 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K V ADITYA CHOWDARY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. Y V SITHA RAMA SHARMA
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set-aside the order dated 26.11.2025 in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal Family Court -cum- IV Additional District Court, Vijayawada.
2. Heard Sri K.V.Aditya Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.V. Sitha Rama Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing on behalf of the State.
3. This revision is preferred against the impugned order dated 26.11.2025 in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal Family Court -cum- IV Additional District Court, Vijayawada, wherein the learned Judge granted interim maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 /wife.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the interim maintenance granted by the learned Trial Court is on the higher side. The learned Judge failed to consider the substantial recurring expenses and the existing financial liabilities borne by the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 would submit that the present revision is preferred challenging the interim maintenance granted to the wife and the main case is still pending. He would further submit that the order passed by the learned Trial Judge is a well reasoned one and does not warrant any interference of this Court in revision.
6. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders, as the impugned order pertains only to interim maintenance.
7. As can be seen from the record, the present revision has been preferred against the order granting interim maintenance. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that it is not in dispute that the wife is residing separately from the petitioner, nor is there any dispute regarding the relationship between the petitioner herein and respondent No. 2. The contentions raised in the present revision are disputed questions of fact, and this is not the appropriate stage to determine the genuineness or otherwise of the claims made by the parties. The learned Trial Judge, after taking into consideration the material placed before him, passed the impugned order. Hence, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds warranting interference with the said order.
8. Considering the submissions made, since this revision is preferred challenging the order dated 26.11.2025 in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal Family Court -cum- IV Additional District Court, Vijayawada, granting interim maintenance of
Rs.50,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 /wife, it is apposite to dispose of the present revision without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties with a direction to the learned Trial Judge to dispose of the main case i.e., F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournment in a casual way by mere asking. The parties are at liberty to raise all their contentions before the Trial Court during the course of enquiry. Learned Trial Judge may appreciate the same and take appropriate decision according to law, without being influenced by any observation made by this Court in the present revision.
9. With the above observations, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of at the stage of admission.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 02.04.2026. UPS
Dt.02.04.2026
UPS