JUDGMENT : G.B. Patnaik, J. - This revision is directed against the order of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Deogarh, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 19/80 in a proceeding u/s 125, Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the wife whereunder the Petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 125/- per month to the opposite party. 2. According to the case of the wife opp. party, she had married the Petitioner in the year 1974 and till 1978 they were living together as husband and wife. In 1978, the opposite party had gone to hear father's house. In 1979, while the opp. party was staying in her father's house, the Petitioner came to her and after staying for a day again left her. After going back, the Petitioner sent a letter accusing that the opposite party was leading an adulterous life and, therefore, he would not accept her as his wife. The opposite party became very much upset and she and her parents tried their best for reconciliation but the Petitioner was adamant and did not accept the opposite party. Since the opposite party had no means, she filed a case u/s 125, Code of Criminal Procedure claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month. 3. The present Petitioner who was opposite party in the court below filed his objection mainly contending that he has not deserted, his wife and on the other hand the wife has deserted him. He also denied to have written any letter alleging that his wife was leading on adulterous life. It is also averred that the wife has inherited sufficient landed properties and does not require any maintenance. 4. The learned Magistrate after considering the evidence on record, both oral and documentary came to the conclusion that the wife-opposite party and her parents and relatives attempted for reconciliation but they failed in their attempts. The so-called offer by the husband to keep the opposite party as his wife in his house to maintain her was not accepted by the court below to be a genuine one. On the question of the assets of the wife, it was held that she was unable to maintain herself. Taking into consideration the income of the husband, the court below assessed the monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs. 125/- per month. 5. On the question of the assets of the wife, it was held that she was unable to maintain herself. Taking into consideration the income of the husband, the court below assessed the monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs. 125/- per month. 5. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner in this revision has contended that in view of his client's offer to maintain the opposite party in case she joins him in his house, the order of the learned Magistrate granting maintenance in her favour is illegal. He has further contended that the quantum of maintenance as granted by the learned Magistrate is rather excessive taking into consideration the income of the Petitioner. Section 125, Code of Criminal Procedure entitles an abandoned wife to receive maintenance from her husband. The pre-conditions for an order u/s 125, Code of Criminal Procedure are husband's sufficient means and refusal to maintain his wife and wife's inability to maintain herself. It is not disputed by the Petitioner that opp. party is his wife and it has been so found by the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate has further found that the opposite party and her relations though tried for reconciliation it could not materialise and thus the husband has abandoned his wife. 6. So far as the Petitioner-husband being possessed of sufficient means, the learned Magistrate has taken into consideration his salary as well as the landed properties. Thus all the pre-conditions for application of Section 125, Code of Criminal Procedure have been satisfied and, therefore, the order of the learned Magistrate directing the Petitioner to maintain the opposite party cannot be said to be contrary to law in any manner. In view of the finding of the learned Magistrate that the so-called offer of the husband to take his wife to his house is not a genuine one. The contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner on this score is devoid of force. 7. As regards the quantum of maintenance, I find that the learned Magistrate has taken into consideration all the relevant materials and the rate of maintenance granted by him cannot be said to be in any way excessive. 8. In the result, therefore, I do not find any merit in this revision which is accordingly dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed