IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29027 of 2006 YOGENDRA PRASAD VERMA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 7 5.8.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for O.P. no. 2 and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner through this application has prayed for quashing of order dated 26.4.2006 passed in Cr. Revision No. 8 of 2005 by the learned Presiding Judge, F.T.C. No. I, Nalanda at Biharsharif, whereby while upholding the order dated 29.10.2004 passed by Sri Bimal Kumar Sinha, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Biharsharif in Case No. 6(M)/81 has dismissed the revision. By order dated 29.4.2004, the learned Magistrate had enhanced the monthly allowances of the applicant wife from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 3000/- per month. The impugned order of the revisional court is sought to be assailed on the twin grounds of the petitioner having superannuated from service in the year 2007 and that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to enhance the amount of maintenance after the words “not exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole” in sub section (d) of section 125 Cr.P.C. was omitted by Act 50 of 2001 w.e.f. 24.9.2001, since the instant case related to a period prior to the amendment aforesaid. I do not find any merit in the aforesaid two contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The superannuation of the petitioner does not entitle him to - 2 - seek any alteration or modification in the order directing payment of maintenance to the wife under section 125 Cr.P.C. Secondly the amendment made in the year 2001 does not debar the Magistrate from changing or modifying the maintenance allowed by him prior to the amendment. Accordingly there is no merit in this application which is dismissed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)