Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1272/2019 of KHAMBAMPATI RAMANANMMA Vs KHAMBAMPATI RAMANAIAH on 30 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1272/2019 Between: 1. KHAMBAMPATI RAMANANMMA, W/O KHAMBAMPATI
APHC010396132019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1272/2019
Between:
1. KHAMBAMPATI RAMANANMMA, W/O KHAMBAMPATI RAMANAIAH, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
R/O.
RADHAKRISHNAPURAM,
SOMASANIGUNTA PANCHAYAT, VENKATAGIRI MANDAL, SPSR
NELLORE DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. KHAMBAMPATI RAMANAIAH, S/O PAPAIAH, R/O. HANUMAN
NAGAR, RADHAKRISHNAPURAM, SOMASANIGUNTA PANCHAYAT, VENKATAGIRI MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
AMARAVATHI FOR THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Revision filed under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to of Criminal Revision petition for enhancement of Maintenance against the judgment dated 11/05/2018 passed in MC No 2/2018 on the file of Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class Venkatagiri
IA NO: 1 OF 2019
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 condone the delay of 472 days in filing the Crl.RC and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2019
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 dispense with the filing of the Certified Copy of the Judgment dated.
11.05.2018 passed in M.C. 2/2018, on the file of SPECIAL JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS VENKATAGIRI and pass IA NO: 3 OF 2019
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 direct the 1St Respondent to pay Rs.25,000/- per month with arrears from 04- 09-2017 till to this date, pending disposal of the above Crl.R.C and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. T VENU GOPAL
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
2. HARISH KATIPALLI
3. LEGAL AID
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1272 of 2019
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.
ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 questioning the Judgment, dated 11.05.2018 passed in M.C.No.2 of 2018 on the file of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Venkatagiri.
2. This being a revision case, this Court would like to proceed with the matter and dispose of the case on merits.
3. As can be seen from the impugned order, the marriage of the petitioner along with respondent took place in the year 1982. They lived happily for five years. The couple blessed with two children out of their wedlock. Thereafter, the respondent No.1/husband addicted to bad vices. As seen from the record, the respondent No.1/husband is working as M.N.O. at Venkatagiri Hospital and now retired. On behalf of the respondent No.1/husband Sri K.Harish, learned counsel has been appointed as learned legal aid counsel in this matter.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/husband would submit that the learned trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence in right perspective, granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month to the wife. The gross salary of the respondent No.1/husband is shown as Rs.55,610/- and after deduction, he used to get only Rs.41,124/-. It was also observed that the respondent/husband was 58 years old as on the date of impugned order. It is represented that he retired five months prior to the impugned order.
5. Considering the said submissions and taking a fair look at the material placed before this Court, the impugned order is well reasoned order. Taking into consideration the income of the respondent No.1/husband and the necessities of the petitioner and their dependency, an amount of Rs.15,000/- was granted as maintenance to the petitioner from the date of petition.
6. In that view, there are no warranting circumstances to interfere in the impugned order.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file an application seeking enhancement of maintenance in case of change of circumstances.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 31.03.2026 M K K
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 1272 of 2019
Date: 31.03.2026 M K K