Patna High CourtCR. REV./83/2015dismissed

Md. Sakir v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-03-03Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.83 of 2015 ====================================================== Md. Sakir, son of Md. Ganni, resident of village Bhairo Kothi, Licchi Bagan, Police Station and District Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Samina Khatoon, wife of Md. Sakir

3. Sahista Khatoon, daughter of Md. Sakir

4. Mazid, son of Md. Sakir 3 and 4 are minor and under the guardianship of their mother, Samina Khatoon All are resident of Bhairo Kothi, Licchi Bagan, Police Station and District Sitamarhi, at present, daughter of Md. Muslim, village Belsand, Police Station Belsand, District Sitamarhi .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha No.-2 For the Respondent/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-03-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.

By order, dated 28.11.2014, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sitamarhi, in Misc. Case No. 118 of 2010, the petitioner has been asked to pay monthly maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- in favour of Opposite Party No. 2, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has, firstly, submitted that the petitioner is ready to keep the Opposite Party No. 2 with all dignity. At the same breath, he has

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.83 of 2015 (2) dt.03-03-2017 2/2 argued that the marriage of the petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2 has been dissolved before the Punches. The stand of the petitioner is, apparently, contradictory.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view his ability to earn, the amount of Rs. 2,000/- per month for maintenance is excessive. The plea has been taken to be rejected and is accordingly rejected.

This application has no merit and it is accordingly dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √