IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No.28499 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 29, 2011 Parmod ...Petitioner Versus Santosh Kumari & another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Kuldip Singh, Advocate, for Mr.Gaurav Singh Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. On 19.9.2011, counsel had taken time to have instructions as to how much permanent alimony the petitioner is prepared to pay to the respondents. Today Mr.Kuldip Singh Advocate appearing for the petitioner seeks adjournment on the ground that the arguing counsel is in personal difficulty. However, on further query by this Court, the counsel says that the petitioner is ready to pay `2.00 lacs as permanent alimony. The maintenance awarded in this case is `4,000/- per month. Rs.2.00 lacs as permanent alimony is too less, for which no indulgence would be called for. I am not inclined to interfere in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Dismissed. November 29, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE