IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17811 of 2007 BHOLA PRASAD SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4 6.5.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned APP for the State. By a detailed order dated 7.6.2005 in Misc. Case No. 90 of 1991 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Katihar in an application under section 125 of the Cr. P.C. the petitioner was directed to make payment of maintenance in favour of his wife and two children, i.e. son and daughter. His order was challenged in revision which was affirmed and therefore the petitioner aggrieved by the same has filed the present application under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the maintenance granted in favour of the wife and two children are on the higher side as the petitioner was drawing salary of Rs. 16,000/- and Rs. 6000/- has been ordered to be paid by way of maintenance though in the application much less amount has been claimed for maintenance. Looking at the fact that the salary of the petitioner has undergone a revision, the cost of living has gone up he has to care for his wife and two children. This Court finds no irrationality or illegality in the order of the courts below; more so keeping in mind the narration and the events, which have emerged in the case. This application has no merit and it is accordingly dismissed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)