HJGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT^M-ASPUR Crimina! Rsvisio" No. 164/2006 Kapil Vasfrakar, S/o. Rama Vastrakar Aged about 28 years, Rv'o. Vlliage Paraghata (Jairamnagar), P.S. Masturi, Districi Biiaspur (C.G.) Current Address ; Ass'stant Jaiier, Central Jall, Bilaspur (C.G.) Non-applicant Smt. Manjula Vastrakar, W/o. Vastrakar, Aged about 23 years, Through Rameshwar Prasad Vastrakar, Piot No. 17 Sector-B Phase-1, Near Saraswati Shishu ?,4andir, Rajkishore Nagar, P.S. Sarkanda, Biiaspur (C.G.) CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION 397 READWITH SECTION 401 QF Cr.P.C. (SB: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) Present: - Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, counset for the appiicant. None for the noR-app'icant. i=?a—isAa^;as^= Orai Order (Passed on 30th June, 2008) This revision is directed against the order dated 10.11.2005 passed by Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Criminai Revision No. 108/05 whereby the learned Fifth Addltional Sessions Judge instead of awardin.g Rs. 1000/- per month to the non-applicant as maintenance, av/arded Rs. 1500/- per month. 2. The order is challenged on the ground that the revisional court has enhanced the amount of maintenance without any application fiied on behalf of the non-applicant undersection 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, "the Code") 3. I have heard Shri Ashok Kumar ShuMa and perused the order impugned. 4. After taksng. into consideratlon, the learned Fifth Additionai Sessions Judge has held that awarding of maintenance of Rs. 1500/- per month wouid be appropriate on the basis of income of the applicant and ^ requirement of the non-appiicant. Learned Fifth Additional Sessions Judge has not cgmmitted any iiiegality or infirmity while assessing the evidence avaliable on record and passing appropriate order in revision. 5. Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, tearned counsei for the appticant submits that after passing of the impugned order, the applicant has been terminated from servtee on 20.10.2006 and at present he is having no source of income. On this ground, the appiicant may avail the remedy before the tria! court under section 127 ofthe Code. 6. Accordingiy, the revision is dismissed. However, the appiicant wouid be at iiberty to avail the remedy avaiiable to hlm under section 127 of the Code, if he so desires. view ofthe above, M.(Cri.)P. No. 496/2006 atso stands disposed of. B/- Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge