Crl. Misc. No. M-6189 of 2010 (O&M) -1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-6189 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.7.2011. James Masih .......Petitioner Vs. Monika ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. L.M.Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner. None for respondent. ..... SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the order dated 24.3.2009 (Annexure P-2) and order dated 9.7.2009 (Annexure P-4). Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent was not the daughter of the petitioner and hence, was not entitled for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Respondent was born on 2.7.1990, whereas the allegation was that the petitioner had got married to Sareen Kumari-mother of the respondent on 20.8.1993. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. Respondent had filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure claiming maintenance. Vide the impugned order dated 24.3.2009 (Annexure P-2), interim maintenance was allowed to the respondent by the trial court to Crl. Misc. No. M-6189 of 2010 (O&M) -2 - the tune of ` 1500/- p.m. The said order was challenged by the petitioner by way of a revision and on 9.7.2009, following order was passed:- “Arguments not advanced. The parties have compromised. The respondent counsel suffered a statement raising no objection in case the maintenance of Monika is reduced from Rs. 1500/- p.m. To Rs. 1000/- p.m. By modification in the Lower Court order dated 24.3.2009. Revisionist also suffered a statement accepting the statement of respondent. In view of the statement made by the revisionist, this revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the modification in the impugned order that the maintenance of Monika is reduced to Rs. 1000/- per month from Rs. 1500/- per month, from the date of application till the decision of application under section 125 Cr.P.C. A copy of this order be sent to lower Court. File be consigned to the record room.” Since the impugned order (Annexure P-4) was passed on the basis of compromise, effected between the parties, no interference by this court is called for. The impugned order dated 9.7.2009 (Annexure P-4) was passed in terms of the statements made by the counsel for the parties. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE July 20, 2011 Gurpreet