CRL RC/871/2026 of Rameshkumar Vs Annakodi
CRL RC No. 871 of 2026
__________
Page1 of 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
CRL RC Nos. 871 and 878 of 2026
and
CRL MP Nos. 6763 and 6727 of 2026
Crl.RC.No.871 of 2026
Rameshkumar
..Petitioner
Vs
1. Annakodi
2. Minor Jessia Routh
..Respondents
Crl.RC.No.878 of 2026
Ramesh @ Rameshkumar
..Petitioner
Vs
Minor Jessia Routh
..Respondent
Prayer in Crl.RC.No.871 of 2026: Criminal Revision case filed under section
438 r/w 442 of BNSS to set aside the order made in C.M.P.No. 820 of 2023 i n
M.C.No.5 of 2021 dated 09.01.2026 passed by the learned District Munsif cum
Judicial Magistrate Court, Uthukuli.
Prayer in Crl.RC.No.878 of 2026: Criminal Revision case filed under section
438 r/w 442 of BNSS to set aside the order made in C.M.P.No. 447 of 2023 i n
M.C.No.1 of 2023 dated 09.01.2026 passed by the learned District Munsif cum
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL RC No. 871 of 2026
__________
Page2 of 4
Judicial Magistrate Court, Uthukuli.
For Petitioner: Mr.C.Ramkumar (in both cases)
COMMON ORDER
These Criminal Revision cases have been filed to to set aside the order
made in C.M.P.No. 820 and 447 of 2023 in M.C.No.5 of 2021 and M.C.No.1 of
2023 dated 09.01.2026 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial
Magistrate Court, Uthukuli.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that 1 st respondent in
Crl.RC.No.871 of 2026 is not at all his wife. However, She filed the application
with false claim.
3. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner contended such
submissions, while perusing counter statement, the issue between petitioner and
respondent is lingering for quite some time and also there was an FI R in the
year 2021 and now that what the Magistrate decides is only the interim
maintenance. Therefore, as rightly observed by the learned Magist rate, it is too
premature to go into the definite finding in respect of disputed f acts. Hence,
based upon the available material, the learned Magistrate has directed the
petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.2,000/- to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL RC No. 871 of 2026
__________
Page3 of 4
daughter.
4. It is the settled principle of law that while exercising the power of
revision, the circumspect is very limited unless the order is palpa bly error and
manifestly injustice and perverse, the question of interference does not arise.
From the perusal of the order, this Court could not find any perversity, though
the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the 1 st respondent is not at all
his wife and 2 nd respondent in Crl.RC.No.871 of 2026 is not at all his daughter.
while considering the interim maintenance application, it is too pre mature to go
into the definite finding. Therefore, this Court does not find any me rit in the
present application.
5. Accordingly, both the Criminal Revision Cases are dismissed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17-04-2026
SHL
To:
1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court,
Uthukuli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL RC No. 871 of 2026
__________
Page4 of 4
C.KUMARAPPAN J.
SHL
CRL RC Nos. 871 and 878 of 2026
and
CRL MP Nos. 6763 and 6727 of 2026
17-04-2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis