IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11292 of 2011 Saheb Alam Versus Rehana Khatoon ---------------------------------- 4. 10.08.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the husband- opposite party-petitioner against the order dated 31.3.2011 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bettiah West Champaran in Maintenance Case No. 1 (M) of 2010 whereby the learned court below granted Rs.1000/- interim maintenance per month in favour of the wife-petitioner-respondent. The learned counsel Mr. Aditya Nath Jha appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that while passing the impugned order the learned court below has not at all given any finding with regard to as to whether she is living separately without any sufficient reason. According to the learned counsel there was application filed by the husband for restitution of conjugal right which was decreed but she did not come and thereafter a divorce application has been filed by the husband-petitioner against her. In such circumstances according to the learned counsel there was no sufficient cause for residing her separately. From perusal of the maintenance application filed by the wife as contained in Annexure 1 of this application it appears that there is allegation made by the wife that she was being subjected to cruelty in connection with the demand of dowry of Rs.40,000/- and she was thrown out of the house and, thereafter Panchayati was called for by the father of the wife and in the Panchayati the petitioner agreed to keep her but instead of taking her to matrimonial home he filed an application for restitution of conjugal right. The said application was compromised thereafter according to the wife she was again being subjected to cruelty in connection with the demand of dowry of Rs.40,000/-. In such view of the matter, I do not find any force in the submission of the learned counsel that there was no sufficient cause of living her separately from the matrimonial house. In such view of the matter, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order as the learned court below has rightly exercised jurisdiction vested in it as provided under 2nd proviso to Section 125 Cr.P.C. Therefore, this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)