← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./59045/2024dismissed

Ravindra Prasad Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-06Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59045 of 2024 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60838 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-585 Year-2016 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE District- Saharsa ====================================================== Ravindra Prasad Gupta Son of Vishwanath Prasad Gupta Resident of village - Bhelwa, P.S. - Gamharia, Distt. - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Poonam Devi D/o of Late Dusharath Prasad Gupta, W/o Ravindra Prasad Gupta Resident of village - Bhelwa, P.S. - Gamharia, Distt. - Madhepura. presently residing at village - Balbanat, O.P. Balbahat, P.S. - Simri Bakhtyarpur, Distt. - Saharsa ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Kumar No. 2, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application has been filed for modification of order dated 05.03.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 60838 of 2019 with regard to exempt the petitioner to pay the maintenance amount of Rs. 3000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2.

3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is paying Rs. 3,000/- per month to the opposite party No. 2 as per the aforesaid order, but by order dated 21.04.2021 passed in Maintenance Case No. 103 of 2021 by learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59045 of 2024(3) dt.06-09-2024 2/2 Principal Judge, Family Court, Saharsa, the petitioner was again directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month opposite party No. 2. It is further submitted that petitioner is a poor man selling clothes from door to door and he is not in a position to pay both the maintenance amounts.

4. This modification petition is devoid of merit. Accordingly, the same stands dismissed.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T