IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.786 of 2008 RAM SHOVIT PASWAN @ SHOVIT PASWAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 3. 18.12.2008. This revision has been preferred against the order dated 3.4.2008 passed by Family Court, Muzaffarpur in Misc. Case No.18 of 2005 thereby a petition filed by the opposite party no.2 under section 127 of the Cr.P.C. has been allowed and the maintenance amount has been enhanced from Rs.400/- to Rs.1500/- per month. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the State. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that after passing of the order under section125 Cr.P.C. in the year 1993 granting maintenance to the opposite party no.2 the opposite party no.2 re-married with another person, namely, Ravi Kumar Srivastava. Therefore, the opposite party is not entitled to get any maintenance from the petitioner. It is further submitted that the amount of enhanced maintenance is very heavy and the petitioner being Peon in Sadar Hospital, Muzaffarpur is not in a position to pay maintenance amount of Rs.1500/- per month. Considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the impugned order. On perusal of the impugned order, it is quite apparent that the allegation of the petitioner that the opposite party no.2 has re-married with Ravi Kumar Srivastava has been rejected on the ground that earlier also this petitioner had filed complaint case in the year 1995 against the opposite party no.2 and - 2 - N.H./ Ravi Kumar Srivastava under section 497 & 494 of the I.P.C. which was ended in their acquittal vide judgment dated 28.98.2005. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order enhancing the maintenance amount from Rs.400/-, which was granted in the year 1993. So far the amount of enhanced maintenance is concerned, it also appears to be just and proper. The petitioner is admittedly in government servant and working as 4th grade employee since 1993. Under the circumstances, the amount of enhanced amount does not require any interference. Accordingly, this application is rejected. ( Ghanshyam Prasad )