THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2147 of 2010 (Dated : 10-12-2010) Between: V.Sravan Kumar S/o late Yadagiri Rao Kothapet, Hyderabad ..Petitioner A n d State of A.P., rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2147 of 2010 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 13.10.2010 passed in Crl.M.P.No.469 of 2009 in M.C.No.186 of 2009 on the file of Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District. 2. The petitioner is father of respondents 2 and 3 herein. The minor children of the petitioner herein, represented by their mother Smt. Muneeswari Devi, filed M.C.No.186 of 2009 claiming maintenance. They also filed Crl.M.P.No.469 of 2009 under Section 125(1)(a) (1)(b) of Cr.P.C seeking interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, it is stated that the petitioner is a builder by profession and he has also been doing real estate business in and around Hyderabad and he is an income tax assessee. Para 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the petition needs to be noted and it reads as hereunder:- “ I submit that the Respondent is a builder and profession also Real Estate business in and around Hyderabad and adjoining areas has taken large sums of amount from my Bank account and thereby investing the same in the Real Estate business and accrued huge profits and also paying I.T Returns since long time as such the Respondent is an Income Tax Assessee from long time.”. 3. The petitioner herein did not chose to file counter. Hence, the learned Judge of the Family Court having considered the averments in the affidavit proceeded to grant interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- each to the minor children, by order dated 13.10.2010. The said order is assailed in this revision. 4. Heard leaned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material brought on record. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the interim maintenance has been granted to the children without affording an opportunity to the petitioner herein to put forth his pleas and therefore, the order impugned in the revision is liable to be set aside. 6. As seen from the order impugned in the revision, the petitioner did not choose to file counter. The learned Judge of the Family Court considered the affidavit filed in support of the petition and proceeded to grant maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month to each of the children. I do not see any illegality or irregularity in the order impugned in the revision warranting interference by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed at the admission stage. However, the learned Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District is directed to dispose of M.C.No.186 of 2009 as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.10-12-2010 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2147 of 2010 (Dated : 10-12-2010)