HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.7558 OF 2008 DATED.02-12-2011 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is ﬁled by the Petitioner/Respondent (For short, ‘the Respondent’) under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash order dated 26-09-2008, passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.62 of 2007 by the learned Sessions Judge, Anantapur, setting aside order dated 04-04-2007, passed in Maintenance Case No.6 of 2005 by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tadpatri. 2. Whereas the Petitioner is the Respondent, the ﬁrst Respondent herein is the Petitioner in the Maintenance Case No.6 of 2005. For the sake of convenience, I refer the parties as arrayed in the Maintenance Case. 3. The Petitioner filed Maintenance Case No.6 of 2005 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for awarding an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards her maintenance against the Respondent-Husband on the ground that they happened to be the legally wedded wife and husband and having got suﬃcient means, the Respondent neglected and deserted her while she got no means to maintain herself. 4. In M.C. No.6 of 2005, the Petitioner got herself examined as PW.1 on her behalf and for the Respondent he got himself examined as RW.1 and got marked Exs.R-1 to R-5 on his behalf and while deposing before the enquiry Court, she testified that she was not aware whether she purchased house plot in Ac.0-07 cents in Utukuru village ﬁelds in survey No.1 under a Registered Sale deed dated 28-01-1989 from one Laxmamma and by then the basic value of that land was Rs.1,15,000/- and she purchased Ac.0-05 cents of house site in Ramarajupalli village ﬁelds, which was included in Kadapa Municipal Corporation vide Doc. No.4435 of 1986 and she had in fact purchased those properties out of her Pasupu Kunkuma amount, whereas the learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 argued that the market value of those two sites were Rs.7,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- respectively. In fact, on that basis the enquiry Court dismissed the Maintenance Case, but the Criminal Revision Petition was allowed with a direction to remand the matter to the enquiry Court for necessary fresh reconsideration and fresh disposal on the ground that actual income of the Petitioner was not derived on the basis of the evidence adduced. 5. It is the contention of learned counsel for the Respondent that the fact that the Petitioner purchased properties with the said amounts is suﬃcient to hold that she got means to maintain herself and therefore the Revisional Court went wrong in remanding the matter to the enquiry Court for fresh consideration with regards to the question of means of her maintenance. 6. On the other hand, it is the contention of learned counsel for the Petitioner that mere holding of the sites is not suﬃcient to hold that she is deriving regular income there from, which is suﬃcient to maintain herself and there is no infirmity in the order of the Revisional Court. 7. The point for consideration is whether there are suﬃcient grounds to set aside the order dated 26-09-2008, passed in the Criminal Revision Petition No.62 of 2007 while reversing the order passed in the Maintenance Case? 8. No doubt that in view of the admission made by the Petitioner as PW.1 it is to be held that she holds the said sites having purchased the same from the said amounts but, while disposing of the Maintenance Case under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. the question of her present means to maintain herself is to be taken into consideration. Merely having the sites does not mean that she is able to fetch income there from unless concrete evidence is there to that eﬀect, which is actually absent here. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence to the eﬀect that she gets suﬃcient income from the two sites, the Revisional Court rightly remanded the matter to the enquiry Court for necessary consideration in that context and as such I do not find any infirmity in that order and hence the Criminal Petition fails and liable to be dismissed. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed conﬁrming the order passed by the Revisional Court in Criminal Revision Petition No.62 of 2007, dated 26-09-2008. __________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Dated:02-12-2011. 160 Dsh. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.7558 OF 2008 December, 02, 2011 DSH