IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1912 of 2009 Jitendra Kumar Singh S/O Sri Shyam Narayan Singh R/O Vill.- Masarh, P.S. Masarh, Distt.- Bhojpur-----------Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Abha Kumari W/O Jitendra Kumar Singh, D/O Baleshwar Singh R/O Vill.- Manpur, P.S. Lalganj, Distt.- Vaishali----------- --------------------------------------------Opposite parties. ---------------------------------- 2 13.12.2011 This application has been preferred under section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the order dated 18th September, 2009 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Vaishali at Hajipur in Maintenance Case No. 96 of 2007 under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by which the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month for maintenance of his wife and a minor child. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and perused the impugned order. It appears that after filing of the aforesaid case on 7.4.2007 notices were issued and after publication of the notices the petitioner appeared through advocate and filed rejoinder but the same was without signature and affidavit. This fact has been denied by learned counsel for the petitioner. This fact whether the notices were served upon the petitioner or the petitioner had knowledge about the case can not be decided in the revisional jurisdiction. Thereafter no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner. The case proceeded ex parte. Even no witness has been adduced on behalf of the petitioner nor even the witnesses examined by the applicant, were cross-examined on behalf of the petitioner (opposite party). It further appears that after considering the evidence and 2 material on record, learned trial court has passed the impugned order. In the fact and circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in the case to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. RPS ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)