AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.—Heard Mr. Chhotelal Mishra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 4.2.2608 of the Principal Judge, Sasaram, Rohtas whereby the Opposite Party-Petitioner has been directed to pay Rs. 1,000/- per month by way of maintenance exercising its power u/s 125 Cr.P.C.
In Raj Kumar Sah Vs. The State of Bihar and Another, , a Division Bench of this Court, of which I was also a Member, has held that the order passed by the Family Court in an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C., a revision application u/s 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is fit to be registered as Criminal Revision and not as Civil Revision.
I, thus, hold that this Civil Revision application is not maintainable in view of the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench of this Court. However, as prayed, the petitioner Is granted liberty to convert this Civil Revision application into a Criminal Revision within two weeks, failing which this application shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench.