IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 22.09.2021 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN Crl.R.C.No.177 of 2018

1.Eswaramoorthy

2.Devayal ... Petitioners/Accused Vs.

1.Yamuna Devi

2.Minor Koushik, Natural guardian and mother D/o.Yamunadevi ... Respondents/Complainants PRAYER: This Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the order passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Erode, in C.A.No. 45 of 2017, dated 22.06.2017, confirming the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Sathyamangalam, Erode District in Crl.M.P.No.4666 of 2009 dated 03.12.2016.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Krishnamoorthy For Respondents : Mr.K.Sudhakar

O R D E R

(This case has been heard through video conference)

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the accused to set aside the order passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Erode, in C.A.No. 45 of 2017, dated 22.06.2017.

2(a).The first respondent is the wife of the first revision petitioner, has filed Crl.M.P.No.4666 of 2009, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sathyamangalam, Erode District, for the offences under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 & 22 of the Domestic Violence Act, seeking compensation for Domestic Violence and for maintenance for herself and for the minor child viz., Koushik.

2(b).The learned Judge, by an order dated 03.12.2016, at paragraph No.12 has held that the defence theory that the first complainant viz., Yamunadevi is living in illegal relationship with one Thangamuthu, is appears to be more probable based upon Exs. R1 to R12. Infact, the evidence of RW2/Sub-Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sathiyamangalam, it is stated that the complaint was given by the legally wedded wife of said Thangamuthu and the complainant herein is living adultry and hence, the Trial Court has rejected for the maintenance of wife, however granted maintenance for a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month in respect of the minor child.

2(c).Aggrieved against the same, the complainant/Yamuna Devi has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 45 of 2017, before the learned III Additional District Sessions Judge, Gobichettipalayam, wherein, the learned Judge has enhanced the maintenance in respect of the minor to Rs.6,000/- from Rs.4,000/- and rejected the maintenance in respect of wife.

2(d).Aggrieved against the same, the accused have preferred the present Criminal Revision Case before this Court.

3.Heard both the learned counsels and perused the materials placed on record.

4.On a perusal of the records, it is stated in the complaint that the marriage was solemnized between the first revision petitioner herein and the first respondent herein on 13.06.2002 at Meenaksi Thirumanamandapam, Sathyamangalam, Erode District. At the time of marriage, the first respondent's family provide Sridhana of 15 sovereigns of gold articles and other sridhana properties also given towards to the marriage expenses. After marriage the first revision petitioner and his family members had demanded the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from the first respondent's parents. Further, through their wedlock, one male child was born, who is the second respondent herein, at that time the first respondent was staying at the revision petitioners'

house.

5.Further, according to the complaint during the matrimonial life, the revision petitioners and the others were abusing and torturing the first respondent herein. Thereby, the first respondent herein has given a complaint before the District Welfare Officer, Erode, dated 12.10.2009 and thereafter, the complaint was sent to the Judicial Magistrate of Sathyamangalam and the same was numbered in Crl.M.P.No.4666 of 2009 for the offence under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 & 22 of the Domestic Violence Act against the revision petitioners and others. After conducting the trial, the trial Court had passed an order to pay the maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month in respect of the second respondent herein and rejected the mai