[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri. Halesh Naika vs Smt. Shobha N on 21 January, 2026
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:3455
CRL.RP No. 1590 of 2016
C/W CRL.RP No. 998 of 2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1590 OF 2016
C/W
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 998 OF 2016
IN CRL.RP No. 1590/2016:
BETWEEN:
SMT. SHOBHA N
W/O HALESHA NAIKA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
RESIDING AT NEAR
MASJID STREET
MALAVAGOPPA
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI A.G. GURURAJA, ADV.)
AND:
SRI HALESH NAIKA
S/O ESHWARA NAIAKA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
Digitally
signed by RESIDING NEAR VEKATASHWARA
NANDINI M S TEMPEL ROAD, MALAVAGOPPA
Location: SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.
HIGH COURT ...RESPONDENT
OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI S.N. SAMEER, ADV.)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
MODIFY THE ORDER DATED 03.03.2016 PASSED IN
CRL.A.NO.17/2015 BY THE III ADDL. S.J., AT SHIVAMOGGA AND
ENHANCE THE MAINTENANCE OF RS.15,000/- PER MONTH ON DATE
OF PETITION.
IN CRL.RP NO. 998/2016:
BETWEEN:
SRI HALESH NAIKA
S/O ESHWARA NAIKA
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:3455
CRL.RP No. 1590 of 2016
C/W CRL.RP No. 998 of 2016
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
RESIDING NEAR
VENKATESHWAA TEMPLE ROAD
MALAVAGOPPA SHIMOGA - 577 201.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SAMEER S.N, ADV.)
AND:
SMT. SHOBHA N
W/O HALESH NAIKA
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/O MASJID STREET
MALAVAGOPPA SHIMOGA - 577 201.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI A.G. GURURAJA, ADV.)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF THE J.M.F.C.-II,
SHIVAMOGGA IN CRL.MISC.NO.147/2012 DATED 05.01.2015
AND LATER CONFIRMED BY THE III ADDL. S.J., SHIVAMOGGA BY
DISMISSING IN CRL.A.NO.4/2015 DATED 03.03.2016.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. These two criminal revision petitions are between the
same parties arising out of the same proceedings, and
therefore, they are heard together and disposed of by this
common order.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
NC: 2026:KHC:3455
HC-KAR
3. Marriage of the parties to these petitions was solemnized
on 11.06.2005. It appears that subsequently the relationship
between the parties got strained. Petitioner in
Crl.RP.No.1590/2016 - Smt. Shobha.N., who is the wife of the
respondent - Sri Halesh Naika, had filed a petition under
Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act, 2005, in Crl.Mis.No.147/2012 before the Court of JMFC-II,
Shivamogga, seeking various reliefs under the provisions of the
said Act. The Trial Court vide the order impugned dated
05.01.2015 partly allowed Crl.Mis.No.147/2012 and directed
the respondent-husband to pay maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per
month to the wife from 01.07.2013 and also further directed
him to pay compensation of Rs.2 lakhs and marriage expenses
of Rs.50,000/-. Additionally, he was directed to return the gold
jewellery pledged by him in State Bank of Mysore, Harige
Branch, and in the event he is not in a position to return the
jewellery, he was directed to give 106.10 grams of 22 Carat
gold plus 20% of its value as making cost, along with penalty of
Rs.25,000/-. Being not satisfied with the order passed in Crl.
Mis.No.147/2012, wife had filed Crl.A.No.17/15 and husband
had filed Crl.A.No.4/2015. The said appeals were dismissed by
NC: 2026:KHC:3455
HC-KAR
the Appellate Court by two separate orders dated 03.03.2016.
Aggrieved by the same, wife is before this Court in
Crl.RP.No.1590/2016 and the husband is before this Court in
Crl.RP.No.998/2016.
4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that
husband - Halesh Naika is a cab driver and after the marriage,
his wife who was a B.A. Graduate had completed her D.Ed.
degree. According to the husband, for her educational expenses
he had paid the money. However, no material was produced in
this regard before the Trial Court. He has also contended that
after the couple started living separately, his wife was
conducting tuition to students and was earning monthly income
of Rs.6,000/- to Rs.7,000/-.
5. The Trial Court having appreciated the oral evidence of
PW-1 & PW-2, which would go to show that the husband along
with his family members owned certain immovable properties,
has awarded maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per month and also
has directed him to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and
Rs.50,000/- towards marriage expenses to the respondent. In
addition to the same, he was directed to return the gold
NC: 2026:KHC:3455
HC-KAR
jewellery of the wife which he had allegedly pledged in the
bank.
6. The allegations made against the husband about domestic
violence has been proved by the wife by examining PW-1 &
PW-2 before the Trial Court and also by producing relevant
documents which are marked as exhibits before the Trial Court.
The material on record would go to show that in addition to the
present proceedings, a criminal case was also registered
against the husband by the wife for the offences punishable
under Sections 498A, 342, 506, 323, 34 IPC and in the said
proceedings, the husband was charge-sheeted.
7. Considering the nature of allegations made against the
husband and also having regard to his avocation and income,
the Trial Court had rightly allowed the petition in part and
granted just and appropriate maintenance and compensation to
the wife. The Appellate Court having re-appreciated the oral
and documentary evidence that was placed on record, has
dismissed both the appeals that were filed by the wife and
husband in Crl.A.No.17/2015 & Crl.A.No.4/2015 and has
confirmed the order passed by the Trial Court. In my
NC: 2026:KHC:3455
HC-KAR
considered opinion, the impugned orders passed by the courts
below do not call for interference. The order of the Trial Court is
just and proper, and if the said order is confirmed, the same
would serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the following
order:
8. Both the Criminal Revision Petitions are dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, do not survive for consideration
and the same are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
KK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81
