IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1715 OF 2009 BETWEEN: K. Malla Reddy S/o. K. Bheem Reddy …. Petitioner AND K. Daya Devi W/o. K. Malla Reddy and another …. Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1715 OF 2009 ORDER: The husband against whom order of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., at Rs.3,000/- per month was granted in favour of the wife / first respondent, filed this revision petition. The petitioner is admittedly working as Chainman in office of the Tahsildar, Shamshabad Mandal. 2. It is contended by the petitioner that he is getting salary of Rs.7,530/- per month and therefore grating of maintenance at Rs.3,000/- per month is excessive and onerous on the petitioner. There is no dispute about the petitioner and the first respondent living separately. They have two children. It is stated that the first child is doing first year Degree course and the Second child is doing 10th Class. There is no dispute that both the children are living with the petitioner. There are marital disputes between the parties. The petitioner / husband filed petition for divorce; and the first respondent / wife filed petition for restitution of conjugal rights before marital Court. In that view of the matter, the lower Court rightly came to the conclusion that there are circumstances for the wife to live separately from the husband and to claim maintenance from him. The first respondent has no means to maintain herself. 3. It is further contended by the petitioner’s counsel that since there are four members in the family, 1/4 of the petitioner’s salary of Rs.7,530/- may be awarded as maintenance to the first respondent. But, Rs.7,530/- is the net salary being received by the petitioner. His gross salary is Rs.10,775/-. G.P.F. of Rs.3,000/- per month is a voluntary contribution and it is not a compulsory deduction. If compulsory deductions from his salary are taken out, then salary of the petitioner comes around Rs.10,000/- per month. Having regard to the said fact, this Court is of the opinion that maintenance of Rs.2,500/- per month to the first respondent will be appropriate. The lower Court granted maintenance from the date of final order. 4. In the result, the revision petition is partly allowed modifying the quantum of maintenance awarded by the lower Court to the first respondent / wife from the petitioner / husband from Rs.3,000/- per month to Rs.2,500/- per month. __________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J July 12, 2010 KTL