IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1662 of 2007 SANGITA DEVI Versus SURENDRA KUMAR PANDEY ----------- 2 25.9.2008 Heard Counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, the impugned order fixing Rs. 2,500/- per month by way of monthly maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, does not suffer from any infirmity so as to be interfered by this Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This Court would take into consideration the fact that in paragraph no.9 of the judgment, the Court below while fixing amount of monthly maintenance of the petitioner has taken into account that the monthly income of the husband opposite party was Rs. 8000/- after allowing the statutory deductions from his gross salary of Rs. 13,647/- and he could have a saving after statutory reductions to the tune of Rs. 8,000/- only. This scale of determination of salary of course is on the basis of a proceeding initiated in the year, 2003 and therefore, cannot uphold for life long of the petitioner. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the amount of monthly maintenance has been fixed on a lowerside and that such gross pay of the 2 husband and was based on his scale of pay of the year 2003 cannot be accepted for the present. It is however observed that if in future the petitioner would find that there is substantial increase in her needs as also in the monthly salary of her husband, she would be entitled to approach the Court below for modification of such amount in terms of Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. With the aforementioned observations, this civil revision application is hereby disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)