THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.478 OF 2009 ORDER:- The revision is filed against the order in Crl.M.P.No.1050 of 2007 in M.C.No.198 of 2005 on the file of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the Trial of Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Case- Cum-Additional Family Court-cum- XXIII Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad. 2. Respondents herein have filed M.C.No.198 of 2005 and an order of maintenance was passed on 31.01.2007 directing the revision petitioner herein to pay total sum of Rs.2,500/- per month from the date of petition i.e., 29.08.2005. The petitioner is said to have paid for 25 months and thereafter, he did not pay the maintenance amount. Consequently, the petition in Crl.M.P.No.1050 of 2007 was filed to enforce the order of maintenance and the said petition was allowed and the revision petitioner is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of 12 months. Challenging that order, the present revision is filed. 3. The point for consideration is whether the order of the lower Court is legal and sustainable? 4. POINT: Evidently, the order in M.C.No.198 of 2005 has become final and in obedience to the said order, some payments were also made by the petitioner herein and default is said to have been committed after 29.08.2007. The contention of the revision petitioner is that he is prepared to take custody of the children and maintain them. As on date he has not moved any application. However, it is pleaded by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the children are now in the custody of the mother of the revision petitioner and they are not in custody of the wife of the revision petitioner. In fact, this plea was not there in the counter before the lower Court as he has not chosen to file any counter. If such is a fact, the petitioner can file an application before the lower Court for alteration of the order of maintenance, till then the petitioner cannot avoid the payment of the maintenance. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, I find that there is no infirmity in the order of the lower Court. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a separate application to redress his grievance about the factum of non-liability in view of the fact that the children are said to be with the mother of the revision petitioner herein. Till then, he shall continue to pay the said money. However, as can be seen from the orders of this Court, the revision petitioner is directed to deposit half of the amount in the lower Court out of the arrears. In view of the above circumstances while confirming the order of the lower Court, the revision petitioner is directed to pay the entire arrears of maintenance within three months otherwise the Court will be at liberty to proceed as per law. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ___________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date: 04-01-2012 Note: Issue C.C. within (04) days. (B/o.) INL