High Court Karnataka High Court

Mallikarjuna @ Guruprasad vs Manjula D/O. Sheshegowda on 28 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Mallikarjuna @ Guruprasad vs Manjula D/O. Sheshegowda on 28 August, 2009
Author: Subhash B.Adi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF' AUGUST 2009
BEFORE)
THE I~iON'BLE MRJUSTICE SUBI-{ASH E.AD3:f 'f ~
CRIMEVAL PETITION NO.17'76/2009':  K I

BETWEEN:   _ 'V  I
1 MALLIKARJUNA @ GURUPRASAD  

S/O.CHANDRASHEKAR ;

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 

N019, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, 

GOTTIGERE, * ' _  '_ E' 

BANGALORE--56O 083., .  _  "_ .1f--rE:EmONER
[By Sri.K.NAGABHUSHAN  A.SSOc:ATES;'ADvS.}

AND:

AGED AEOUTEI2  
BASAVEVSHWARA-..V_NAGA.'§ '- *

1 MANJULAA;Dv,{OiAIéH.ESE~IE_GQWDA 1} .

EALwPET. ' . _  

BELAGODU HQBL1" ._  

SAKLESHPUR TALUK »-- I 

HASSAN DIST.     RESPONDENT

 " {By Saim}.  ADV.)

 . "i§:~£IPAs"OE1;.E.P'RFI*i;EO U/S482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR
THE 'PE:zTEON'EB..PEAYING THAT THIS I-ION'BLE COURT MAY BE

 PLEASED flrov QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN

C.MISC.NO.'l28/O8 ON THE FILE OF' THE C.J. {JR.DN.) & JMFC.,

"--«C1""'SAKLESHPE.I_R' INCLUDING THE ORDER DATED 26.7.08 VIZ,
 V'DISREC'I7{_E\?G THE PETETIONER HEREIN TU PAY MAINTAINANCE
=_A.'iVIOU_I\%TA.' OF RS.10,000/- PER MONTH TO THE RESPONDENT
 __E°*IEREIN" FROM THE DATE MOI'? PETN., AND ALSO TO PAY
  RS. 10,00,000/-- TO THE RESPONDENT HEREIN AS COMPENSATION.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:



 -vcIf1oose'-sf, V 

-2-
ORDER

Petitioner has called in question the order dated

26. 7.2008 wherein the learned Magistrate in

Cr1,Misc.No.128/2008 has directed the petitioner to~.._ pay

maintenance of Rs.10,000/– per month and also

iakhs compensation. This order has been called

this petition.

2. The proceedings are initiated ‘under thei_”pro’visions’tofu.L

the Protection of Women from Dorriestic v:o1¢ncé’.:A5; and any

order passed under the pro’visionsi’o’f is appveeaiavble under
Section 29 of the said Act. $ince is provided, it

is not a case for intetjferendge. _,

Accordiirgiy, fails and same is dismissed.
However, libertypdisv the petitioner to file an appeal, if he

Sd/Q
Itidéé