Crl.R.No.1878 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.R.No.1878 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:October 4, 2010 Atro Devi .....Petitioner v. Ram Sarup .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Vivek Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present revision petition has been filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as `Cr.P.C.') against order dated 5.6.2010, passed by learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar, in an application filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., vide which petitioner-wife was granted ad interim maintenance @ Rs.2000/- per month during the pendency of the main petition. I have heard learned counsel for the revision-petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that ad interim maintenance @ Rs.2000/- per month, as granted by learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar, is on the lower side. Further contended that petitioner is an old lady of 60 years of age and it is very difficult for her to make both ends meet with this amount of Rs.2000/- per month. However, respondent-husband is also posted as Peon. The petitioner was a divorcee when she contracted marriage with respondent. It has been stated by counsel for the petitioner that respondent was also a divorcee. It is a matter of evidence regarding other liabilities and responsibilities of respondent-husband and regarding his carry home salary. However, taking into consideration the status of the parties as respondent- Crl.R.No.1878 of 2010 (O&M) -2- husband is posted as Peon, it cannot be said that ad interim maintenance @ Rs.2000/- per month, as fixed by learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar, is on the lower side. Hence, in view of these facts, it cannot be said that any illegality or material irregularity has been committed by learned District Judge, Family Court, Hisar, by passing the impugned order, warranting interference by this Court. There is no merit in the present revision petition. The same is hereby, dismissed. 4.10.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge