IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.739 OF 2010 Between: Amara Srinivasa Rao … PETITIONER And Amara Saroja and another … RESPONDENTS This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.739 OF 2010 ORDER: 1. The petitioner/husband questions order dated 09.02.2009 passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole, in D.V.C.A.No.101 of 2008 confirming order dated 08.08.2008 passed by the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Ongole, in Crl.MP.No.2111 of 2008 in D.V.C.No.6 of 2008, by which the Magistrate granted interim maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month to the first respondent/wife, under Section 20/23 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in short, the Act). 2. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that the first respondent is getting interim maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month from civil Court in another proceeding and that therefore, the first respondent is not entitled to claim interim maintenance again in the present Domestic Violence case. This argument of the petitioner’s counsel is contrary to Section 20(1)(d) of the Act, which reads as follows: “the maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children, if any, including an order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force.” Therefore, law relating to domestic violence permits claim of maintenance in spite of there being another order of maintenance either under Section 125 Cr.P.C. or under any other law for the time being in force. 3. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that the first respondent is a working woman and is getting Rs.4,000/- per month as salary from Ratna Medical Corporation. The lower appellate Court considered that fact also and commented that there are diversified contentions on that aspect to the effect that the first respondent is working in Ratna Medical Corporation at one point and in Satya Sai Pharma at another point. The lower appellate Court observed that no documentary evidence is produced to prove the said fact. The petitioner’s counsel states that presently the first respondent is working in Government Hospital. It may be a subsequent event. If it is true, then the petitioner is at liberty to produce necessary evidence before the Magistrate during enquiry of Domestic Violence case, which is pending before him. As on today, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with order of interim maintenance granted by the Courts below over and above the interim maintenance granted by the civil Court. 4. Hence, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Ongole, is directed to dispose of main Domestic Violence case as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three months from today. ___________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J July 06, 2010 MD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.739 OF 2010 July 06, 2010