R.Shajagan And Others vs Meharajbeevi

Shamim Ahmed, J

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed to call for the records and set aside the judgment dated 16.06.2025 passed in Crl.A.No.38 of 2022 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Theni, Theni District, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner in CC.No.469 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila (JM Level), Theni, Theni District dated 23.03.2022.

2.This Court, vide order dated 20.11.2025 in Crl.M.P.(MD) No. 16818 of 2015 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.998 of 2025 had passed the following order:-

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to relax the condition imposed upon the petitioners in paragraph No.10(iii) of the order made in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10408 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.998 of 2025, dated trial Court at 10.30 am., on all working days until further orders.

2.Heard Mr.P.Senguttuarasan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs.T.Seeni Syed Amma, learned counsel for the respondent.

3.Mr.P.Senguttuarasan, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as on today, arrears of maintenance amount including the litigation expenses payable to the respondent/wife and to the female child, aged about 6 years, come to around Rs.10,50,000/- and the first petitioner/husband is now ready to transfer some property in the names of the respondent/wife and the female child. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that he will also advise his clients to make compliance of the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Theni in MC.No.70 of 2022, dated 26.04.2024, by which, the first petitioner/husband was directed to pay a total sum of Rs.5,000/- towards maintenance per month to the respondent/wife and to their female child and prays this Court that the parties may be directed to appear before this Court to settle the dispute among themselves.

4.Mrs.T.Seeni Syed Amma, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioners have not paid single penny as maintenance to the wife as well as to the child, as directed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Theni in MC.No.70 of 2022, dated 26.04.2024 and has no objection to the proposal made by the petitioners. It was further submitted that the respondent is also ready to settle the matter with the petitioners.

5.Accordingly, as prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioners, adjournment is allowed.

6.Put up this case 'for orders' on 25.11.2025 before this Court. On that date, the petitioner as well as the respondent are directed to appear before this Court in person.”

3.Today, even this Court waited for 10 minutes when the matter was called in the revised call, Mr.P.Senguttuarasan, learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners is not present before this Court and Mrs.T.Seeni Syed Amma, learned counsel for the Respondent is present along with her client, namely, Meharajbeevi.

4.Mrs.T.Seeni Syed Amma, learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the proposal made by the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners before this Court on 20.11.2025 was not complied with. It was also informed that the Revision Petitioners, namely, R.Shajagan and Najinithowlath, were present in the morning session, but they left the Court now.

5.Accordingly, one last opportunity is given to the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners to argue the case. The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners is directed to argue the case on the next date fixed, without fail, otherwise, the case will be decided in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the Respondent is also directed to inform about this order in writing to the the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners.

6.Put up this case 'for orders' on 27.11.2025 before the appropriate Bench.