IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1639 of 2008 BASUDEO THAKUR Versus SUMITRA DEVI ----------- 2 26/9/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court the order under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure fixing liability for payment of maintenance against the petitioner, cannot be faulted on any score. The submission of counsel for the petitioner that as a matter of fact the finding arrived at by the court below that the opposite party is wife of the petitioner is perverse, to say the least, is an argument of desperation. The court below has gone into that aspect at great length and having anylised all the evidences on records has arrived at the finding that the opposite party is wife of the petitioner. If the petitioner still is not satisfied, it will always be open to him to seek appropriate relief before the competent court seeking declaration that the opposite party is not his legally married wife. Till it is done so the petitioner must be bound by the finding of the court below and keep 2 on paying the amount of maintenance. With the above observation/direction this application is disposed of. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar