Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Gundu Sai Karthik vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 2026

APHC010719722025
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                  AT AMARAVATI                         [3396]
                           (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                   THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL
                     TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

                                  PRESENT

  THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

                   CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1530/2025

Between:

   1. GUNDU SAI KARTHIK,, S/O. LATE GUNDU RAMASHARMA, AGED
      ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O. BOSTON
      SCIENTIFIC LIMITED, CASHEL ROAD,        CLONMEL CITY,
      TIPPERARY, IRELAND, REP. BY HIS GPA HOLDER SMT. GUNDU
      SAVITHRI, W/O. LATE GUNDU RAMASHARM AGED ABOUT 59
      YEARS R/O. D.NO. 24-106 JAYAVARAPU VARI STREET NEAR
      SIVALAYAM R AGRAHARAM GUNTUR - 522003

                                                              ...PETITIONER

                                     AND

   1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
      PROSECUTOR,  HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH    AT
      AMARAVATHI.

   2. GUNDU SRINIVASA HIMA BINDU, W/O GUNDU SAI KARTHIK,
      HINDU, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 23-7-28A, GIRIVEDHI,
      GANESH ENCLAVE APARTMENTS, SATYANARAYANAPURAM,
      VIJAYAWADA. KRISHNA DISTRICT.

                                                        ...RESPONDENT(S):

     Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision
Case, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records and set aside the
Order dated 26.11.2025 passed in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.)
No. 1082 of 2024 on the file of the Hon'ble Principal Family Court -cum- IV
Addl. District Court, Vijayawada
                                         2


IA NO: 1 OF 2025

      Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
stay the operation of the order dated 26.11.2025 passed in CrI.M.P.No.764 of
2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No. 1082 of 2024 on the file of the Hon'ble Principal
Family Court -cum- IV Addl. District Court, Vijayawada, pending disposal of
the above Criminal Revision Petition

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

      Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
vacate the interim stay granted on 05.01.2025 in I.A.NO.1 OF 2025 in
CRL.R.C.NO.1530 OF 2025 and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

   1. K V ADITYA CHOWDARY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

   1. Y V SITHA RAMA SHARMA

   2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                                            3


     THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

                  CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1530/2025



JUDGMENT:

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set-aside the order dated 26.11.2025 in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal Family Court -cum- IV Additional District Court, Vijayawada.

2. Heard Sri K.V.Aditya Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.V. Sitha Rama Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing on behalf of the State.

3. This revision is preferred against the impugned order dated 26.11.2025 in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal Family Court -cum- IV Additional District Court, Vijayawada, wherein the learned Judge granted interim maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 /wife.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the interim maintenance granted by the learned Trial Court is on the higher side. The learned Judge failed to consider the substantial recurring expenses and the existing financial liabilities borne by the petitioner. 4

5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 would submit that the present revision is preferred challenging the interim maintenance granted to the wife and the main case is still pending. He would further submit that the order passed by the learned Trial Judge is a well reasoned one and does not warrant any interference of this Court in revision.

6. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders, as the impugned order pertains only to interim maintenance.

7. As can be seen from the record, the present revision has been preferred against the order granting interim maintenance. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that it is not in dispute that the wife is residing separately from the petitioner, nor is there any dispute regarding the relationship between the petitioner herein and respondent No. 2. The contentions raised in the present revision are disputed questions of fact, and this is not the appropriate stage to determine the genuineness or otherwise of the claims made by the parties. The learned Trial Judge, after taking into consideration the material placed before him, passed the impugned order. Hence, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds warranting interference with the said order.

8. Considering the submissions made, since this revision is preferred challenging the order dated 26.11.2025 in CrI.M.P.No.764 of 2024 in F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 passed by the learned Principal Family Court -cum- IV Additional District Court, Vijayawada, granting interim maintenance of 5 Rs.50,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 /wife, it is apposite to dispose of the present revision without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties with a direction to the learned Trial Judge to dispose of the main case i.e., F.C.O.P. (M.C.) No.1082 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournment in a casual way by mere asking. The parties are at liberty to raise all their contentions before the Trial Court during the course of enquiry. Learned Trial Judge may appreciate the same and take appropriate decision according to law, without being influenced by any observation made by this Court in the present revision.

9. With the above observations, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of at the stage of admission.

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 02.04.2026.

UPS 6 131 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1530/2025 Dt.02.04.2026 UPS