Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

B. Chaya Devi and ors. Vs. B. Prabhakar Reddy and anr.

B. Chaya Devi and ors. vs B. Prabhakar Reddy and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Andhra Pradesh Decided Feb 17, 1993
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/431031

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Revision Petition No. 425 of 1990
Subject
Family;Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Family;Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 125

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

B. Chaya Devi and ors.

Advocate C.B. Rammohan Reddy and ;D.L. Kiran Prakash, Advs.

Respondent

B. Prabhakar Reddy and anr.

Advocate C. Sadasiva Reddy, Adv. and ;Public Prosecutor

Legal References

Reported In
1993(1)ALT(Cri)550; I(1994)DMC23

Excerpt

- .....as contemplated under section 125 of criminal procedure code. when a person is being maintained not as of a right, but by way of mercy or otherwise, he cannot be called as a legal dependant, which section 125 of criminal procedure code comprehends such being the legal position, the fact of first respondent herein maintaining his brother is not relevant for reducing the quantum of maintenance, granted in the instant case. as such, i set aside the reversing order passed by the court of sessions, in crl.r.p. no. 16 of 1989 and restore the order passed by the court of first additional judicial first class magistrate, kurnool. there is yet another aspect to be considered is with regard to continuance of maintenance to the first petitioner, as she is appointed as a police constable during the month of october, 1991. if that be so, her salary will not be less than rs. 1,000/-per month and the maximum quantum of maintenance which can be granted is only rs. 500/- in all. in that case, the first petitioner will be legally, disentitled to claim maintenance from the first respondent, but not from the institution of the case, but only from 1.1.1992 as she was employed immediately before that cut off date. in the circumstances, i hold the following :(1) the first petitioner shall be entitled to maintenance at the rate of rs. 250/- per month from the date of petition before the court of magistrate upto 31.12.1991 and not thereafter ;(2) the petitioners 2 and 3 shall be entitled to the maintenance at the rate of rs. 150/- per month each to tailing to rs. 300/-per month right from the date of petition before the court of magistrate;(3) the first respondent shall clear of all the arrears by the end of may, 1993 and he shall pay rs. 300/- per month i.e., rs. 150/- to each of the petitioners 2 and 3 regularly within 10th of every calendar month commencing from march 1993.3. this criminal revision case in allowed is part of the extent indicated above.

Full Judgment

Subhashan Reddy, J.

1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the reversing order of the Court of Sessions reducing the maintenance granted in favour of petitioners 1, 2 and 3 herein from Rs. 250/-, 150/-, 150/-per month to Rs. 150/-, Rs. 100/-, Rs. 100/~ per month respectively.

2. The reasons given for reducing the maintenance amount is that first respondent herein has got a brother to be educated, as such he is incurring expenditure. This reasoning is extraneous as the brother is not one of the dependants as contemplated under Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code. When a person is being maintained not as of a right, but by way of mercy or otherwise, he cannot be called as a legal dependant, which Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code comprehends such being the legal position, the fact of first respondent herein maintaining his brother is not relevant for reducing the quantum of maintenance, granted in the instant case. As such, I set aside the reversing order passed by the Court of Sessions, in Crl.R.P. No. 16 of 1989 and restore the order passed by the Court of First Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kurnool. There is yet another aspect to be considered is with regard to continuance of maintenance to the first petitioner, as she is appointed as a Police Constable during the month of October, 1991. If that be so, her salary will not be less than Rs. 1,000/-per month and the maximum quantum of maintenance which can be granted is only Rs. 500/- in all. In that case, the first petitioner will be legally, disentitled to claim maintenance from the first respondent, but not from the institution of the case, but only from 1.1.1992 as she was employed immediately before that cut off date. In the circumstances, I hold the following :

(1) The first petitioner shall be entitled to maintenance at the rate of Rs. 250/- per month from the date of petition before the Court of Magistrate upto 31.12.1991 and not thereafter ;

(2) The petitioners 2 and 3 shall be entitled to the maintenance at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month each to tailing to Rs. 300/-per month right from the date of petition before the Court of Magistrate;

(3) The first respondent shall clear of all the arrears by the end of May, 1993 and he shall pay Rs. 300/- per month i.e., Rs. 150/- to each of the petitioners 2 and 3 regularly within 10th of every calendar month commencing from March 1993.

3. This Criminal Revision Case in allowed is part of the extent indicated above.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial