IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.95 of 2008 Haidar Ali, son of Md. Mohammad Ali, resident of village- Navadih Bigha Club Road, P.S.- Murangabad, District- Aurangabad. ………Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Shahala Praveen, wife of Haidar Ali. 3. Nayala Pravin, D/o Haider Ali. (Both are resident of village-Dakakkhana, aurangabad Saraiya, P.S.-Amjhor, District- Rohtas) ………Opposite Parties ----------- 6. 26.09.2011 The husband-petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 12.12.2007 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sasaram, Rohtas in Misc. Case No.80/2004 by which he has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.700/-per month to his wife, opposite party no.2 and Rs.700/-per month to his minor daughter, opposite party no.3 as maintenance. Heard Dr. Lilawati Kumari, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Anjum Praween, the learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. Nityanand Tiwari, the learned counsel for the State. It appears that it is admitted position that the petitioner is the husband and father of opposite party nos. 2 and 3 respectively. It also appears that the wife and 2 daughter (opposite party nos. 2 and 3) of the petitioner have no means to maintain themselves. The learned Principal Judge has considered the evidence adduced on behalf of both the parties and after considering the facts and circumstances has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.700/-per month to his wife, opposite party no.2 and Rs.700/-per month to his minor daughter, opposite party no.3 as maintenance. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)