SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(AP) 27

A.GOPAL REDDY
Yerram Vinod – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mummaneni Srinivasa Rao, Advocate.
For the Respondent: R1 - Public Prosecutor, R2 to R4 - None Appears.

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) is filed to quash the orders passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam in Crl.R.P.No.1 of 2007 dated 18-09-2007, whereby he dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner upholding the orders of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam awarding maintenance to the major daughters in M.C.No.2 of 2006 dated 14-12-2006. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. In spite of service of notice none appears for the respondents 2 to 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents 3 and 4 who are major daughters are entitled to maintenance under the personal laws, viz., Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short “the Act”) but not under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel also contends that the Magistrate cannot award maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to the major daughters, who are entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. till they attain majority but not thereafter. Since the respondents 3 and 4 are aged 31 and 29 years respectively, not suffering from physical or mental abnormality



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top