Patna High CourtCR. REV./152/2015dismissed

Rabi Bhusan Prasad @ Ravi Bhusan Prasad Gupta v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-03-07Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.152 of 2015 =================================================================

1. RABI BHUSAN PRASAD @ RAVI BHUSAN PRASAD GUPTA Son of kashi Prasad Gupta, Resident of village- Manjhagarh, P.S and District- Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Santoshi Devi W/o Rabi Bhusan Prasad , D/o Rameshwar Prasad, Resident of VillageMirganj, P.S. Mirganj, District- Gopalganj.. .... .... .... Opposite Parties ================================================================= Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Adv & Mr. Vijay Bardhan Pandey, Adv For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, Adv & Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv For the State : Mr. Anant Kumar, APP ================================================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 07-03-2017 By impugned order dated 20.10.2014 passed in CIS Case No. Miscellaneous 536 of 2013, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gopalganj has directed for payment of Rs. 1500/- as monthly maintenance allowance in favour of Opposite Party No. 2, the petitioner's wife, and Rs. 500/- in favour of Opposite Party No. 3, the minor child of the petitioner and Opposite party No. 2, from the date of filing of the maintenance case i.e., 24.03.2012. Assailing the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has no such source of income as to pay sum of Rs. 2000/- for maintenance of his wife and

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.152 of 2015 dt.07-03-2017 2/2 minor child.

From any angle the quantum of amount directed to be paid as maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., does not appear to be on the higher side. The impugned order does not require any interference. The said order allowing maintenance at the rate as indicated above was passed in the year 2014. The Opposite Party No. 2 shall be at liberty to apply for enhancement of the maintenance amount by invoking the provisions under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C in changed circumstance, if so advised.

This application has no merit which is, accordingly, dismissed with the observation as above.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Ranjan/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 09.03.2017 Transmission Date 09.03.2017