IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13831 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

SRI NAGARAJU S/O LATE NARASEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT BANAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT- 562 117 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G. K. SHIVA PRAKASH., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT.MANJULA @ MANCHAMMA W/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.

2. SRINIVAS Digitally signed by S/O NAGARAJU LAKSHMI T AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS L H o ig ca h t C io o n u : rt of Karnataka 3. SRIDHARA S/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT BANAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT- 562 117.

…RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS)

PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.08.2014 IN CRL.MISC NO.210/2012 IN THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KANAKAPURA WHICH IS FURNISHED AS ANNEXURE-A., AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is before this Court in this petition, challenging the order dated 19.08.2014 passed by the Court of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Kanakapura, granting maintenance to the respondents.

2. The relationship of the parties is not in dispute.

The first respondent is the wife and second and third respondents are sons of the petitioner. They filed a petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month to each of them. The learned Magistrate, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence adduced, was pleased to award Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.1,500/- per month each to the sons of the petitioner.

3. The material on record shows that the petition seeking maintenance was contested by the petitioner. He was himself examined as RW.1 and examined one more witness as RW.2. The Trial Court has come to the conclusion that the petitioner is capable of providing maintenance to the respondents herein and the contentions that the children are working and earning, was not substantiated by any materials. As against the claim of Rs.8,000/-each sought by the respondents, the learned magistrate thought it fit to award a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.1,500/- per month each to sons of the petitioner, till they attain the age of majority.

4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even after attaining the age of majority, the second and third respondents are claiming maintenance from the petitioner. The said submission is misconceived since the order itself clearly shows that the maintenance awarded to second and third respondents is till they attain the age of majority. In the facts and circumstances, the maintenance awarded by the Trial Court is just and proper and does not call for any interference.

5. Be that as it may, this petition is filed after 11 years from the date of the order passed by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner has kept quiet all these years, without any grievance against the impugned order. No grounds are made out to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Petition is dismissed

6. I.A.No.1/2025 is disposed of Sd/-

(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20