THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1141 of 2004 JUDGMENT: The first respondent herein-wife filed M.C.No.7 of 2001 before the Additional Munsif Magitrate, Chirala, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/- per month. The Court below after recording the evidence adduced by both the parties, dismissed the said M.C., holding that the respondent is not entitled to maintenance. The same was questioned by the wife, who is the first respondent herein by filing Criminal Revision Petition No.49 of 2002 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Ongole, who, after reassessing the entire evidence on record, partly allowed the Crl.R.P. by his order, dated 04.02.2004, awarding maintenance at the rate of Rs.250/- per month from the date of filing of the petition i.e., from 31.01.2001. The same is questioned by the petitioner- husband in this Revision. Though this Court admitted this Criminal Revision Case on 02.07.2004, it refused to grant interim suspension of the impugned order. The marital relationship between the petitioner and the first respondent is not in dispute. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-husband. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner-husband and on a perusal of the impugned order, this Court is of the view that the lower appellate Court appreciated the evidence on record from right perspective and awarded maintenance to the first respondent herein-wife at the rate of Rs.250/- per month, which is the bare minimum in these hard days. Hence, I see no merits in the Revision warranting interference of the impugned order by this Court. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 17th February 2011 DR