Mahabir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.1060 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Mahabir Kumar S/o Raghunath Prasad, R/o Mohalla- Chhatradhari Bazar, P.S.- Bhagwan Bazar, District- Saran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Jyoti Devi @ Soni W/o Mahabir Kumar D/o Lalbabu Agrahari, R/o Akhadaghat Road, near G.D. Mother School, P.S.- Town, DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Md. Sufiyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 27-07-2022 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this application.

Considering that it is a case of the year 2018 and it relates to payment of maintenance to the wife - opposite party and her minor daughter, this Court is considering the revision application on it's own merit on the basis of the materials available on the record. It appears on perusal of the impugned judgment that admittedly the opposite party is the wife of the petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has neglected his wife and minor daughter and they have been ousted from the matrimonial house on 18.06.2013. The opposite party has no independent source of income whereas her husband is having a family business and is taking contract work of supply of furniture and it's repairing work in the Punjab National Bank and the State Bank of India. He also owns

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1060 of 2018(5) dt.27-07-2022 2/2 a commercial vehicle. The petitioner has admitted about the shop and the commercial vehicle.

In the given facts and circumstances, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarpur has directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 2500/- per month to his wife and Rs. 1500/- per month to the minor daughter with effect from the date of the application i.e. 19.05.2014.

This Court finds that both the parties were allowed adequate opportunity to adduce their respective evidences in the learned court below. Only after considering their respective evidences the impugned judgment has been passed. Looking to the grounds raised in the revision application, this Court finds that no significant ground has been raised to deny the responsibility to pay the maintenance allowance to the wife and minor daughter. There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment.

This revision application has, thus, no merit. It is dismissed accordingly.

Let the court below enforce the impugned order expeditiously.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) Rajeev/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.