IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.374 of 2007 SANJAY KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4. 3.9.2008. This application has been filed against the order dated 8th February,2007 passed in Case No.51M of 2005 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.800/- to the opposite party no.2. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Perused the impugned order. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is still ready to keep the opposite party no.2 with all dignity. The petitioner has also filed a matrimonial suit for restitution of conjugal life, which is still pending. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no means to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.800/-. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the opposite party referred to paragraphs 6 and 7 of the impugned order and submitted that actually, the lower court took effort and the matter was also settled but later on this petitioner threatened the opposite party no. 2 as a result she refused to live with the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has illicit connection with the wife of Brijkishore who is a partner of the petitioner. Considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and as also the grounds mentioned in the impugned order. I find no illegality or impropriety. The court below has rightly granted - 2 - N.H./ the maintenance to the opposite party no.2. So far the quantum of maintenance is concerned, it is only Rs.800/- per month. As per finding, the petitioner has income of Rs.15,000/- from his business. In such situation, it would not proper to interfere in the quantum of maintenance. Accordingly, this application is rejected. ( Ghanshyam Prasad )