Crl.M.P.(MD) No.7539 of 2019

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 03.03.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Crl.M.P.(MD) No.7539 of 2019

in

Crl.R.C(MD)SR.No. 24917 of 2019

Yogeswaran @ Anand

...Petitioner/Petitioner

Vs.

Jesintha

...Respondent/Respondent

PRAYER in Crl.M.P(MD)No.7539 of 2019:

Criminal Miscellaneous

Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, praying this Court

to condone the delay of 87 days in filing the above Criminal

Revision Petition against the order dated 11.02.2019 made in

Crl.M.P.No.353 of 2017 in M.C.No.115 of 2012 (CJM) on the file of

the Family Court, Tiruchirapalli.

PRAYER In Crl.R.C.(MD)SR. No.24917 of 2019:This Criminal Revision

Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. to set aside the

order dated 11.02.2019 made in Crl.M.P.No.353 of 2017 in M.C.No.115

of 2012(CJM) on the file of the Family Court, Tiruchirapalli by

allowing this Criminal Revision Petition.

For Petitioner

: Mr.P.Santhoshkumar

ORDER

The criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed to condone

the delay of 87 days in filing the criminal revision case.

2.The criminal revision case has been filed challenging the

order passed in Crl.M.P.No.353 of 2017 in M.C.No.115 of 2012, on the

file of the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli.

3.The petitioner got married with the respondent herein.

Thereafter, they got separated. Hence, the respondent filed a

petition in M.C.No.115 of 2012 for maintenance. On receipt of the

notice, the petitioner failed to appear before the Court below and

as such, the Court below ordered maintenance of Rs.1,500/- as

monthly maintenance. However, on receipt of the said notice from

the trial Court, the petitioner failed to appear and as such, he was

set Exparte and the Exparte order has been passed. Aggrieved by the

same, the petitioner has filed a petition to set aside the exparte

order with the huge delay of 1540 days.

4.On perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the condone

delay petition, it is revealed that he was detained under Goondas

Act, by order, dated 04.09.2012. Therefore, he could not able to

1/2

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Crl.M.P.(MD) No.7539 of 2019

appear before the trial Court. However, for execution of the

maintenance order, the respondent filed a petition under Section 128

of Cr.P.C and in which, notice was ordered and the same has been

duly received by the petitioner. Even then, he failed to appear

before the trial Court. Therefore, thus it is clear that after his

detention, he was released and he duly received the notice issued in

the petition filed by the respondent under Section 128 of Cr.P.C.

Therefore, the Court below rightly dismissed the petition to condone

the delay of 1540 days in preferring the revision petition as

against the order of maintenance.

5.That apart, the Court below had ordered only a sum of

Rs.1,500/- as monthly maintenance payable by the petitioner to the

respondent. Therefore, the petitioner has no merits to succeed the

criminal revision petition. This Court is not inclined to allow the

condone delay petition. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous

petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected criminal

revision case in Crl.R.C.(MD)SR.No.24917 of 2019 is rejected in SR

stage itself.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar (CS III)

// True Copy //

/ /2022

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

lr

Note : In view of the present lock down owing

to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order

may be utilized for official purposes, but,

ensuring that the copy of the order that is

presented is the correct copy, shall be the

responsibility of the advocate/litigant

concerned.

To

The Judge,Family Court,

Trichy.

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7539 of 2019

03.03.2022

MGJ(24.03.2022) 2P 2C

2/2

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/