IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.360 of 2008 VINOD SAH @ VINOD KUMAR SAH Versus GAYATRI DEVI ----------- 2. 15.9.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court the impugned order directing the pension an amount of Rs. 2000/- per month by way of maintenance for the wife and a minor son does not suffer from any error. The petitioner is employed in Indian Army and has a regular income from his salary to pay the aforesaid amount and as even the quantum of amount is neither excessive nor illegal. Counsel for the petitioner, however, would contend that though the petitioner may not have objection in making payment of maintenance as directed by the court below, he should upon making such payment both arrear and current, be given reprieve from facing criminal litigations filed by the wife opposite party. While this Court is absence of the wife opposite party is not in a position to issue any direction upon her to withdraw those criminal cases but then it would be open for the petitioner to approach the 2 Surendra/ court below and file an application for one time settlement of the dispute wherein the court below after issuing notice and hearing the wife may pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law on the line of terms and conditions of mutually agreed between the parties. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.)