THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2280 of 2010 (Dated : 10-12-2010) Between: Pothu Raju Nazveen Babi Khammam ….Petitioner A n d State of A.P., rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P and others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.2280 of 2010 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 14.10.2010 passed in M.P.No.303 of 2010 in O.P.No.602 of 2009 on the file of the Judge, Family Court at Visakhapantnam. 2. The petitioner is the husband of 2nd respondent and father of the 3rd respondent herein. The wife and son filed O.P.No.602 of 2009 on the file of Family Court, Visakhapantam under Section 125 Cr.P.C seeking maintenance. They also filed M.P.No.303 of 2010 seeking interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.2,000/- respectively. The petitioner filed counter resisting the application. 3. The learned Judge, Family Court, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, proceeded to grant maintenance to the son at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month while negativing to grant interim maintenance to the wife, by order dated 14.10.2010. The said order is assailed in this revision. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the judgment impugned in the revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the wife is an Assistant Professor and she is earning salary of Rs.15,000/- and she can maintain herself and also the third respondent. A further submission has been made that the petitioner is not an earning member and therefore, he is not in a position to pay any amount towards maintenance to 3rd respondent-son. 6. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. The 3rd respondent is son of the petitioner and he is aged 20 months. The petitioner being the father is under an obligation to provide maintenance to the 3rd respondent-son. The trial Court having taken into consideration the material brought on record granted interim maintenance to the 3rd respondents-son at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month. The quantum of maintenance appears to be quite reasonable. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the order impugned in the revision. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed at the stage of admission. However, the trial Court is directed to dispose of O.P.No.602 of 2009 as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of 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.2280 of 2010 (Dated : 10-12-2010)