IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1500 of 2006 MADAN RAM Versus POONAM DEVI ----------- 3 20.1.2009 Heard Mr. Jitendra Kishore Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 12.7.2006 of the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna passed in Maintenance Case No. 111(M) of 2004 whereby the Principal Judge concerned has directed the Opposite Party-Petitioner to pay Rs.3,000/- per month by way of maintenance exercising its power U/S 125 Cr.P.C. In Raj Kumar Sah Vrs. The State of Bihar & Anr. reported in 2008 (4) PLJR 817, a Division Bench of this Court, of which I was also a Member, has held that the order passed by the Family Court in an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., a revision application under Section 19 (4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 is fit to be registered as Criminal Revision. I, thus, hold that this Civil Revision application is not maintainable in view of the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench of this Court. However, as prayed, the petitioner is granted liberty to convert this Civil Revision application into a Criminal Revision within two weeks, failing which this application shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench. shahid (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)