IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.802 of 2009 RAM KHELAWAN PAHALWAN SON OF DHANPAT YADAV RESIDNET OF VILLAGE-JAWATRI, POLICE STATION-BARHAT, DISTRICT JAMUI …PETITIONER Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. JANKI DEVI WIFE OF RAM KHELAWAN PAHALWAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-JAWATRI, P.S. BARHAT, DISTRICT JAMUI …OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioner :Mr.Abdul Mannan Khan & :Mr.Md. Najmul Hoda For State :Mr. Dayal, APP ----------- 03. 04.04.2011 Heard counsel for the parties. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 04.04.2009, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamui in Case No. 35M of 2006, whereby on a consideration of materials available on record, learned court below rejected the application of the petitioner filed under section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Earlier the said court on a consideration of evidence and pleadings on record had passed an order on 07.04.2007 whereby the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 800/- per month as maintenance to his wife (o.p.no.2). Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to paragraph 6 of rejoinder to the counter affidavit, submits that for maintenance of his wife he had already executed a sale deed in respect of 1.20 ½ acres of land (Annexure-3). It is contended that petitioner is suffering from paralytic attack and is now a disabled person. The deposition of the wife in the proceeding has been enclosed as annexure-2 of the rejoinder. It is submitted 2 with reference to the said deposition that she has not denied about possession of the land and carrying on agricultural operations thereon and reaping income therefrom. In paragraph 7 she has admitted that the husband is now a disabled person and is being looked after by her second wife. It has also been deposed by her that she is residing in the house of her husband after occupying part of the same along with her son and son-in- law. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the wife has not rebutted the aforesaid stand taken in the rejoinder. On the strength of these facts appearing from records, it is contended that the quantum of maintenance as fixed under the impugned order need to be slashed. This Court, in view of aforesaid submissions and facts appearing from records, is satisfied that quantum of maintenance fixed under the impugned order be slashed at least by Rs. 200/- since the wife is in possession of land so alienated in her favour and she is residing in the house of the petitioner after occupying portion thereof. It is further somewhat admitted position that she is earning from the land alienated in her favour which she has admitted in her deposition by asserting that she is engaged in cultivation of land in her possession. Accordingly the application is allowed. The quantum of maintenance fixed under the impugned order dated 07.04.2007 payable by the petitioner in favour of the wife(o.p.no.2) is reduced to Rs.600/- per month. In other words, the petitioner is required to pay his wife a sum of Rs. 600/- per 3 month with effect from 01.04.2011. Order dated 07.04.2007 passed by learned court below fixing quantum of maintenance is modified in the aforesaid manner. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )