IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.742 of 2009 SUDIST YADAV . --- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. BASUDEO YADAV 3. MANOJ KUMAR 4. MANTI KUMARI --- OPP. PARTIES. ----------- 03 13.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is husband. By the order impugned he has been directed to pay a consolidated sum of Rs. 2500/- (Twenty five hundred) for maintenance of his son and daughter (opposite party nos. 3 and 4). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the Court below lacks relevant details inasmuch as date or duration has not been indicated for payment of maintenance to her daughter /opposite party no.4. It is contended with reference to Annexure-2, that his daughter Manti Kumari (opposite party no.4) has already been married and is living in her ‘sasural’. It is contended that the quantum of maintenance is, therefore, required to be reduced appropriately. Having heard the parties and on a perusal of the materials on record, this Court is satisfied that the present application be disposed of by the following order:- Let the petitioner approach the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Madhepura by filing appropriate application in terms of Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for reduction/alteration of the maintenance amount appropriately on the ground that his daughter/opposite party no.4 has already been married and is being taken care of by her husband. If any such application is filed within a period of 04 weeks from today along with a copy of the present order, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law expeditiously. Sym/ ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)