IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.864 of 2006 PARAS NATH KURMI @ PARAS KURMI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashwini Kumar Rai, Adv. For the State : Mr. Gopesh Kumar, App., For the Opposite party : Mr. Satya prakash Bihari, Adv. 6. 26.8.2008. This Cr. Revision has been filed against the order dated 29.4.2005 passed by Principal Judge, Family court, Chapra in Maintenance Case No. 40 of 1998 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.700/- per month to opposite party no. 2. Heard learned counsel for the both the parties. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a daily wage earner whereas opposite party no. 2 is earning Rs.3000/- per month. The income earned by the petitioner is not sufficient to maintain himself. Therefore, he is unable to pay the amount of maintenance. It is further submitted that the petitioner is still ready to keep opposite party no. 2 with him. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submitted that the father and mother of the petitioner are earning members. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also perused the impugned order. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and also the fact that the petitioner is a daily wage earner, I am of the view that the amount of maintenance - 2 - requires to be interfered. Accordingly, this Cr. Revision is dismissed with a direction to the petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.600/- instead of Rs.700/- as directed by the court below. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)