HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12871 of 2010 ORDER: The facts of the case are that the petitioner is husband of 1st respondent and father of 2nd respondent. The 1st respondent filed a petition in M.C.No.7 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Miryalaguda, against the petitioner along with Crl.M.P.No.1289 of 2007 seeking interim maintenance. The learned Magistrate, on hearing both sides, awarded interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the 1st respondent and Rs.2,500/- per month to the 2nd respondent from the date of filing of the petition, by an order dated 23.06.2007. Challenging the said order, the petitioner preferred Criminal Revision Petition No.49 of 2007 on the file of the V Addl. Sessions judge (III Fast Track Court), Nalgonda at Miryalaguda and the learned Sessions Judge, having gone through the material available on record, dismissed the said revision, vide order dated 06.12.2010. The same is questioned in this Criminal Petition. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that without conducting any enquiry the learned Magistrate awarded interim maintenance to respondents 1 and 2. 4. As far as the 2nd respondent is concerned, no proof is filed before the Court to establish the fact that the 2nd respondent is major even by the date of filing of the maintenance case. So, the order passed by the learned Magistrate in connection with the 2nd respondent is not interfered with at this stage. 5. As far as the 1st respondent is concerned, in fact the learned Magistrate without conducting any enquiry awarded maintenance to her. When it is the case of the petitioner that the 1st respondent is an earning member and also running a hostel, the learned Magistrate would have conducted enquiry prior to passing the order in Crl.M.P.No.1289 of 2007. 6. Considering the above facts, as far as the 1st respondent is concerned, the order passed by the trial Court as confirmed by the appellate Court is hereby set aside and the learned Magistrate is directed to conduct enquiry as to the earning capacity of the 1st respondent and to pass an order, in accordance with law. With regard to 2nd respondent, the order passed by the trial Court, confirmed by the appellate Court is confirmed. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. __________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 27th December, 2010 CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12871 of 2010 (Disposed of) 27th December, 2010 CBS