Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 28136 Kant
Judgement Date : 25 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:48161
CRL.RP No. 262 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 262 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. NAGAMMA
W/O NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT DODDAGUBBI VILLAGE,
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
BANGALORE EAST TALUK,
PIN CODE:560077
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVINDRANATH M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
Digitally R/O YARRAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE,
signed by DODDAGUBBI, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
MALATESH BANGALORE EAST TALUK,
KC
PIN CODE:560077
Location:
HIGH ...RESPONDENT
COURT OF (BY SRI. K SHIVASHANKAR, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING
TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 23.11.2015
PASSED BY THE COURT OF LXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND S.J.,
BENGALURU CITY (CCH.NO.68) IN CRL.A.NO.588/2014
INSOFAR AS IT IS AGAINST THE PETITIONER, PARTLY
REVERSING THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 02.01.2014
PASSED BY THE COURT OF MMTC-III, BANGALORE CITY IN
CRL.MISC.NO.242/2012.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:48161
CRL.RP No. 262 of 2016
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri Ravindranath M., learned counsel for the
revision petitioner and Sri K. Shivashankar, learned counsel for
the respondent.
2. Revision petition is filed by the complainant - wife
challenging the order passed by the learned Trial Magistrate,
modified by the First Appellate Court.
3. Petitioner being the wife had a son through her first
marriage and suppressing the first marriage, she married to the
respondent, who had also suppressed his first marriage.
4. There was bickering between the petitioner and
respondent which ultimately resulted in filing the petition under
the provisions Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act, 2005 (D.V. Act for short).
5. Learned Trial Magistrate without appreciating the
factual aspects of the matter awarded maintenance to the
petitioner - wife and her son from first marriage, which was
modified by the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court,
NC: 2024:KHC:48161
taking note of the fact that respondent - husband is not bound
to maintain the son born to the petitioner - wife through her
first marriage.
6. The said order is called in question in this revision.
7. Having regard to the provisions of the Protection of
Women from D.V. Act, the order of the First Appellate Court is
absolutely justified and does not call for interference that too in
the revisional jurisdiction by this Court.
8. Accordingly, following:
ORDER
Revision petition is meritless and hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE
MR
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!