Karnataka High Court
Siddappa S/O Revaneppa Khoder vs Durgamma W/O Siddappa Khoder on 20 August, 2025
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10543
CRL.RP No. 100161 of 2020
C/W CRL.P No. 100897 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100161 OF 2020
(397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS))
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100897 OF 2020
(482 (CR.PC)/528(BNSS))
IN CRL.R.P. NO. 100161 OF 2020:
BETWEEN:
SIDDAPPA S/O REVANEPPA KHODER,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR WORK,
R/O: KAVALETTU, TQ: RANEBENNUR,
DIST: HAVERI-581 123.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M.B. GUNDAWADE, SRI. A.M. GUNDAWADE AND
SRI. S.A. KULKARNI, ADVOCATES)
AND:
Digitally signed
RAKESH
by RAKESH S
HARIHAR 1. DURGAMMA W/O SIDDAPPA KHODER,
S Location: HIGH
COURT OF
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: PETTY BUSINESS,
HARIHAR KARNATAKA
R/O: KAVALETTU, TQ: RANEBENNUR,
DHARWAD
BENCH
DIST: HAVERI-581 123.
2. KUMARI PREMA D/O SIDDAPPA KHODER,
AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: KAVALETTU, TQ: RANEBENNUR,
DIST: HAVERI, RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR
REPRESENTED BY HER MINOR GUARDIAN
MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1,
DURGAMMA W/O SIDDAPPA KHODER.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GIRISH S. HULMANI, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10543
CRL.RP No. 100161 of 2020
C/W CRL.P No. 100897 of 2020
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS FROM CRL.R.P. NO.148/2018, FROM THE FILE OF
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT, HAVERI, (SITTING
AT RANEBENNUR), AND ALSO RECORDS FROM ADDITIONAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND II ADDL. JMFC COURT, RANEBENNUR, IN
CRL.MISC.NO.25/2015 AND TO EXAMINE THE SAME IN
RESPECT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SESSIONS COURT IN
CRL.R.P. NO.148/2018 DATED 11/02/2020 ABOUT ITS
CORRECTNESS, LEGALITY, PROPRIETY AND FINDINGS
THEREON AND TO SET ASIDE THE SAME AND TO PASS AN
ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09/05/2018,
PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.25/2015, BY ADDITIONAL CIVIL
JUDGE AND II ADDITIONAL JMFC COURT, RANEBENNUR AND
ALSO THE ORDER DATED 11/02/2020, PASSED IN CRL. REV. P.
NO.148/2018, BY II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, AT HAVERI (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR).
IN CRL.P. NO. 100897 OF 2020:
BETWEEN:
SIDDAPPA S/O REVANEPPA KHODER
@ NARAYANAPPANAVAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR WORK,
R/O: KAVALETTU, TQ: RANEBENNUR,
DIST: HAVERI.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M.B. GUNDAWADE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DURGAMMA W/O SIDDAPPA KHODER
@ NARAYANAPPANAVAR,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: PETTY BUSINESS,
R/O: KAVALETTU, TQ: RANEBENNUR,
DIST: HAVERI-581 123.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10543
CRL.RP No. 100161 of 2020
C/W CRL.P No. 100897 of 2020
HC-KAR
2. KUMARI PREMA D/O SIDDAPPA KHODER
@ NARAYANAPPANAVAR,
AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: KAVALETTU, TQ: RANEBENNUR,
DIST: HAVERI, RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR
REPRESENTED BY HER MINOR GUARDIAN
MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1,
DURGAMMA W/O SIDDAPPA KHODER.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GIRISH S. HULMANI, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C.(UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO CALL
FOR THE RECORDS FROM CRL.R.P. NO.137/2018, FROM THE
FILE OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT,
HAVERI, (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR), AND ALSO RECORDS
FROM ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND II ADDL. JMFC COURT,
RANEBENNUR, IN CRL.MISC.NO.25/2015 AND TO EXAMINE
THE SAME IN RESPECT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
SESSIONS COURT IN CRL.R.P. NO.137/2018 DATED
11/02/2020 TO SET ASIDE THE SAME AND TO PASS AN ORDER
QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 09/05/2018, PASSED IN
CRL.MISC.NO.25/2015 (FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF
CR.P.C., BY ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND II ADDITIONAL
JMFC COURT, RANEBENNUR AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT OF
CONFIRMATION DATED 11/02/2020, PASSED IN CRL. REV.P.
NO.137/2018, BY II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, AT HAVERI (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR).
THESE PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10543
CRL.RP No. 100161 of 2020
C/W CRL.P No. 100897 of 2020
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
These two petitions are between the same parties
and therefore, they are heard together and disposed of by
this common order.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Respondents herein had initiated proceedings
against the petitioner, who is the husband of respondent
No.1 and father of respondent No.2, under Section 125 of
Cr.P.C., claiming maintenance and had filed Criminal
Miscellaneous No.25/2025 before the Jurisdictional Court
of Magistrate. The said petition was partly allowed on
09.05.2018 and petitioner was directed to pay monthly
maintenance amount of Rs.1,500/- each to respondent
Nos.1 and 2 from the date of order. Aggrieved by the
same, petitioner herein had filed Criminal Revision Petition
No.137/2018 and seeking enhancement of the
maintenance amount, respondents had filed Criminal
Revision Petition No.148/2018. The Court of II Additional
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10543
HC-KAR
District and Session Judge, Haveri, sitting at Ranebennur
vide order dated 11.02.2020 dismissed Criminal Revision
Petition No.137/2018 and partly allowed Criminal Revision
Petition No.148/2018 and the maintenance awarded to
respondent No.2 was enhanced to a sum of Rs.2,500/- per
month. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before
this Court in the above captioned two petitions.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having
reiterated the grounds urged in the petitions submits that
maintenance amount awarded in favour of the respondent
No.2 is on the higher side. On the other hand, learned
counsel for respondents has justified the orders impugned
herein.
5. The respondent No.1, who is the wife of the
petitioner, had examined herself before the Trial Court as
PW1 and two documents were got marked as Exs.P1 and
P2 in support of her claim. Her father was examined as
PW2. The petitioner, who is an autorickshaw driver had
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10543
HC-KAR
examined himself as RW1 before the Trial Court and his
brother was examined as RW2. 24 documents were got
marked in support of his defence before the Trial Court.
The Trial Court, after appreciating that, in addition to the
daily earning of the petitioner as an autorickshaw driver to
the tune of Rs.800/- to Rs.1,000/- per day, he also had
income from his agricultural properties, has awarded
maintenance of Rs.1,500/- each to respondent Nos.1 and
2. Exs.P1 and P2 are the RTC extracts of the agricultural
lands which stand in the name of father of the petitioner.
It is not in dispute that the said properties are ancestral
properties and therefore, petitioner also has a share in the
said property. Though petitioner has contended before the
Trial Court that respondent No.1 owns a provision store
and she has her own source of income, he has failed to
prove the same.
6. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion
that the order of maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,500/-
per month to the respondent No.1 and Rs.2,500/- per
NC: 2025:KHC-D:10543
HC-KAR
month to the respondent No.2 granted by the Revisional
Court is fully justified and it cannot be said that the same
is on the higher side. The relationship between the parties
is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that respondent
No.2, who is the daughter of the petitioner is being taken
care of by the respondent No.1. She is a student aged
about 20 years now.
7. Under the circumstances, I do not find any
merit in these two petitions. Accordingly, the petitions are
dismissed.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
RSH / CT:BCK
