Surendra Thakur v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.939 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District- ====================================================== Surendra Thakur, Son of Gopal Thakur, Resident of Village- Bali- Belwa, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
State of Bihar 2.
Ragini Devi @ Rajani Devi, Wife of Surendra Thakur, Resident of VillageBali- Belwa, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at present residing of Village- Manglapur, P.S. Sangrampur, District East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Binoy Kumar For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-02-2023 This criminal revision application has been filed against order dated 30.07.2016 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, East Champaran, Motihari in Maintenance Case No. 218 of 2011 whereby, the petitioner was directed to make payment from the date of application i.e., from 09.06.2011 of Rs. 5,000/- per month (Rs. 3,000/- current maintenance allowance + Rs. 2,000/- part of the maintenance allowance) to opposite party No. 2 (wife of the petitioner) as maintenance. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not in the financial position to pay the maintenance as directed by the Court below as he works as a casual labour and he is not earning so much as to pay the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.939 of 2016(8) dt.20-02-2023 2/2 monthly maintenance amount at the rate as directed by the Court below.
I have carefully perused the impugned order. The monthly maintenance allowance of Rs. 3,000/- per month to the opposite party No. 2 (wife of the petitioner) in this age of high inflation cannot be said to be on higher side or excessive. In the backdrop of facts and circumstances of the case as mentioned in the impugned order, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order which requires any interference by this Court. Findings arrived at by the Court below are based on evidences available on record. I do not find any merit in this application. This criminal revision application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T