HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRL.R.C.No.348 of 2005 Date:18-04-2011 Between: Pothula Raja Babu. ……. Petitioner And Smt.Pothula Padma Kumari & another ……..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.348 OF 2005 ORDER: The petitioner filed this Criminal Revision Case against the docket order dated 21-02-2005 in M.P.No.558 of 2004 in M.P.No.285 of 2003 in M.C.No.10 of 1992 passed by the learned Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, 2. The petitioner is the husband and respondent No.1 is his wife. Their marriage took place on 7.12.1989. For the sake of convenience, the petitioner and respondent No.1 are hereinafter referred to as “husband” and “wife” respectively. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: Immediately after four months of the marriage that took place on 7.12.1989, the husband and in-laws started harassing the wife and assaulting her demanding to bring Rs.10,000/- from her parents. They also forcibly took away her gold ornaments and sent her to her parents’ house. Hence, she filed the above maintenance case claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month from her husband as he is having immovable properties wroth of Rs.1,00,000/- and drawing a salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. As the husband was not attending the Court, he was set ex parte by the Family Court. The wife got herself examined as P.W.1, but no documents were marked. In her evidence, she has reiterated the averments made in the maintenance petition that her husband and in-laws were demanding additional dowry and they were harassing and assaulting her on that count and ultimately she was driven away from the matrimonial home. She also alleged that her husband used to consume alcohol and come home during midnights and used to beat her. The Family Court, taking the evidence of the wife, who was examined as P.W.1, into consideration, allowed the maintenance case granting of Rs.500/- per month towards her maintenance by its order dated 11-6-1993. Thereafter, she filed M.P.No.285 of 2003 in the said maintenance case seeking enhancement of monthly maintenance from Rs.500/- to Rs.5,000/- per month from the husband and the same was allowed. Subsequently, she filed M.P. No.558 of 2004 stating that her husband paid the enhanced monthly maintenance amount at the rate of Rs.5,000/-per month only up to August, 2003 and thereafter, he has not been paying the same and seeking direction to the husband to pay the arrears of maintenance of Rs.60,000/- i.e. from September,2003 to August,2004. In the said petition, notice was ordered to be issued to the husband. On 24.1.2005, the husband was present and a copy of the petition was furnished to him and the matter was posted for payment on 21-2-2005. On 21-2-2005, the Family Court passed the following order: “Both parties called present. The respondent did not pay single pie till today though he is having means, he intentionally evading the payment. Hence send him to Central Jail for a period of one month or until he pays the arrears of the maintenance amounts, whichever is earlier”. Accordingly, as per the above order, the husband was sent to jail. Hence, this revision. 4. This court while admitting the revision on 9-3-2005, passed the following interim order in Criminal M.P. No.426 of 2005: “Interim suspension of the Docket Order dated 21-02-2005 of the Court of the Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam in Crl.M.P.No.558 of 2004 in Crl.M.P.No.285 of 2003 in M.C.No.10 of 1992, on condition of the petitioner depositing an amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) and paying Rs.2,500/- ( Rupees two thousand five hundred only) to the first respondent every month by the tenth of each succeeding month. The first of such payment of Rs.2,500/- shall be by 20.3.2005. The amount of Rs.20,000/- towards arrears of maintenance payable by the petitioners to the first respondent shall be deposited to the credit of Crl.M.P.No.558 of 2004 in Crl.MP No.285 of 2003 in M.C.No.10 of 1992 within six weeks from today. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with two sureties each in a like sum, each to the satisfaction of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam. In default of any of the conditions above, the bail granted herein shall stand revoked on occurrence of such default.” 5. It is the case of the husband that in compliance of the said orders of this Court, he had deposited Rs.20,000/- towards arrears of maintenance and has been paying Rs.2,500/- to the wife. It is submitted on his behalf that he is under suspension now and presently drawing a monthly pay of Rs.5,038 /- (Rupees five thousand and thirty eight only), and placing a photostat copy of his salary certificate dated 25.2.2005 to that effect, submitted that he is unable to pay the monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/-per month to his wife and prayed that the same may be reduced appropriately. 6. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned docket order dated 21.2.2005 passed by the Family Court. 7. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner - husband submitted that the conditional interim order of this Court dated 9-3- 2005 while granting bail to the husband, is complied with by the husband, it is not known whether he has paid Rs.20,000/-towards part of the arrears of maintenance and has been paying Rs.2,500/-per month towards monthly maintenance to the wife since no material is placed before this Court to that effect. If, in fact, he has been so paying, he has got to continue to pay the same amount and he is so directed to pay the said amount every month to the wife and if he continues to pay so, there is no need to send him to jail as ordered by the Family Court vide docket order dated 21.02.2005, and therefore, the same can be set aside. 8. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of setting aside the impugned docket order dated 21-02-2005 in M.P.No.558 of 2004 in M.P.No.285 of 2003 in M.C.No.10 of 1992 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, on condition that the husband shall pay the remaining arrears of maintenance within a period of three (3) months from today and he shall continue to pay Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only) per month to the wife towards her maintenance on or before 10th of every succeeding month as ordered by this court vide interim order dated 9-3-2005, failing which the revision shall stand dismissed and the impugned docket order shall be enforced. However, it is needless to say that the husband has to pay the entire arrears of maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month and shall pay the monthly maintenance at the same rate to the wife as ordered by the Family Court in M.P.No.285 of 2003 in M.C.No.10 of 1992, which is not challenged. It is also needless to say that the wife is at liberty to take appropriate steps for recovery of the entire arrears of maintenance. ________________ B.N.RAO NALLA,J Date: 18-04-2011 Mrb/Stp HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRL.R.C.No.348 of 2005 Date: 18-04-2011