ARBIND KUMAR GIRI @ ARBIND GIRI Vs. DHANA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Chhotelal Mishra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 4.2.2008 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 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. In Raj Kumar Sah vs. The State of Bihar & Anr. reported in 2008(4) PLJR 817, 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 under Section 125 Cr.P.C, a revision application under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984i s fit to be registered as Criminal Revision and not as Civil Revision.

(3.) I , thus, hold that this Civil Revision application is not maintainable in view of the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench of this Court.