THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7858 OF 2008 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in M.C.No.2 of 1997 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palamaner, Chittoor District. Brief facts are that the petitioner herein filed Crl.M.P.No.425 of 2007 in M.C.No.2 of 1997 under section 127(2) Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order of maintenance passed in M.C.No.2 of 1997 in view of the decree passed by the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor in O.S.No.495 of 2003 dated 17.10.2003 that the second respondent is not the wife of the petitioner. The learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Palamaner dismissed said Crl.M.P.No.425 of 2007. Questioning the said order, the petitioner filed Crl.R.P.No.47 of 2008 and the learned Sessions Judge, Chittor vide his order dated 19.09.2008 while allowing the said revision petition remanded the matter to the court below for fresh disposal keeping in view the order passed by the competent civil court. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner approached this court and filed the present petition. Heard both sides. As seen from the order passed by the learned Magistrate, this court is of the view that the learned Magistrate has passed the said order without keeping in view the finding of the competent civil court that the second respondent herein is not the wife of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is not liable to pay compensation to the first respondent. The learned Sessions Judge has elaborately discussed this issue in detail and remanded the matter to the court of first instance for fresh disposal keeping in view the order passed by the competent civil court with regard to the marital status of the parties. Further, on 01.12.2008 when the matter was listed before this court, this court while ordering notice to the respondent adjourned the matter by four weeks. Thereafter the same is listed before me only today. In that view of the matter also, as no order of interim nature is there, the court below must have proceeded with the matter. Hence, I do not see any grounds to interfere with the said order passed by the learned Sessions Judge at this length of time and accordingly this petition is dismissed. ----------------- 29.04.2010 Kvsn