HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRL.P.No.7705 of 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash order dated 18-09-2008 passed in Crl.M.P.No.321 of 2008 in D.V.C.No.1 of 2008, on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsampet. 2. The petitioner herein is the 1st respondent and the respondents 2 to 4 herein are the petitioners in the said Domestic Violence Case. The respondents 2 to 4 claim to be the wife and children of the petitioner and they filed the said case and also the said application for interim maintenance and obtained order which reads: “Petitioner present. Respondent absent. Counter not filed. Heard. Petition partly allowed. The respondent No.1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,000/-, Rs.1000/- and Rs.1000/- each to petitioners No.1 to 3 towards interim maintenance with effect from today 18-09-2008.” 3. It is mainly claimed on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order was passed without any service of notice upon him and in fact, the 2nd respondent filed M.C.No.42 of 2007 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Warangal, for grant of maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month in her favour and Rs.2000/- each per month in favour of the respondents 3 and 4, and the Judge, Family Court, without affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner of being heard, awarded Rs.1000/- to the 2nd respondent, Rs.800/- to the 3rd respondent and Rs.700/- to the 4th respondent in that maintenance case which should be taken into consideration in the said interlocutory application and hence the impugned order is not tenable. 4. Therefore, the point for consideration is whether sufficient grounds are there to set aside the order impugned. 5. The order does not provide that relevant notice was served upon the petitioner. Further, it is not a speaking order. Even while granting interim maintenance, the question of financial capacity of the petitioner and other mitigating circumstances are to be taken into consideration. A copy of the order in the maintenance case is filed before the Court, and it reflects the amounts awarded to the respondents 2 to 4 towards their maintenance under ex parte order as claimed by the petitioner. While passing the order of interim maintenance, dated 18-09-2008, those aspects were also to be considered. 6. Therefore, the order passed by the trial Court is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Court below to consider it afresh basing upon all the relevant circumstances. 7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed in part remanding the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal of Crl.M.P.No.321 of 2008 in D.V.C.No.1 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsampet, taking into consideration the relevant circumstances in the light of the observations made above, after giving due notice to both the parties. ____________________ 18th November 2011 kvr