IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2010 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1931 RPFC.No. 8 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02/06/2009 IN CMP (EX) 649/2008 IN MC.30/2003 of FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... REVISION PETITIONER N.SAJITH KUMAR, S/O.SRINIVASAN, CONVICT NO.7397, CENTRAL PRISON, KANNUR. BY ADV. ADV.V.SREEJA (STATE BRIEF) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN SRI.P.A.HARISH THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P(F.C).No.8 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16 th day of March, 2010 ORDER In this revision preferred from Central Prison, Kannur, the revision petitioner who was the respondent in CMP(Ex). No.649 of 2008 in M.C.No.30 of 2003 on the file of the Family Court, Kozhikode challenges the order dated 2.6.2009 passed by the Family Court, sentencing the revision petitioner to simple imprisonment for four years for the non-payment of the arrears of maintenance allowance for a period of 61 months totalling to Rs.1,84,000/-. 2. I heard Advocate Smt.V.Sreeja the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner on State Brief and Advocate Sri.Harish the learned counsel for the respondents. 3. As per the final order dated 25.11.2004 in M.C.No.30/2003, the revision petitioner was directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,500/- per month to his wife RP(FC)No.8/2010 2 and Rs.800/- each to two of his minor daughters from the date of petition namely 27.1.2003. Eventhough the revision petitioner challenged the said order before this Court by filing R.P.(F.C)No.64 of 2006, this Court dismissed the RP (FC) so far as it pertains to the wife of the revision petitioner but slightly interfered with the quantum of maintenance to minor daughters by reducing the maintenance from Rs.800/- to Rs.750/- per daughter. The final order of this Court was passed on 28.10.2008. There was an interim stay in the above RP(F.C). It was within one year of disposal of the above RP(FC) that the respondents filed CMP No.649 of 2008 claiming arrears for 61 months totalling to Rs.1,84,000/-. The said claim has been allowed as per the impugned order in which the Family Court has sentenced the revision petitioner to simple imprisonment for four years ( 48 months). 4. Eventhough the learned counsel for the revision petitioner placing reliance on the decision reported in RP(FC)No.8/2010 3 Sundaran v. Sumathy (2006(3) KLT 7250 submitted that the court below was not justified in imposing a sentence of imprisonment beyond 12 months in one application, I am unable to agree with the above submission. The learned Single Judge has occasion to consider the observation thereunder in the subsequent decision in Narayanan v. State of Kerala ( 2008(1) KLT 852). It is finally observed that the court can impose sentence beyond 12 months in one application, provided the application is filed within one year of the date on which the maintenance became due. In the light of this decision which is applicable on all fours to the facts of this case, I see little scope for interference with the impugned order, which is accordingly confirmed and this Revision is dismissed. Dated this the 16 th day of March, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj