SURYA KUMAR TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) THIS petition has been filed against the order dated llth January, 1993, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Midna-pore Sadar, in M. P. No. 499 of 1991. ( 2 ) THE opposite party had filed an application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. alleging that she is the wife of the petitioner and had been living with him ever since June, 1990. A child was born out of this wedlock. The petitioner had failed to maintain the child. Hence an application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. was filed. ( 3 ) SUBSEQUENTLY by an application dated 8. 9. 1992 the opposite party applied for amending the petition seeking to claim maintenance for her also. The said petition was allowed and the said order is under challenge in this revisional petition. ( 4 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the impugned order on. the ground that the said order allowing the amendment amounts to harassment to the petitioner. That the opposite party has initiated the criminal case under Sections 417,422 and 378 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. Hence in the light of the said case, the question of marriage between the petitioner and opposite party does not arise. In the background of the aforesaid facts, the petitioner cannot and any new plea for her own maintenance in the petition. The proposed amendment has been sought to be added after one year of the filing of the maintenance case. ( 5 ) AS regards the other criminal case, it is not a subject matter of challenge in this proceeding. The opposite party might have filed a complaint case but the facts stated in that case cannot be taken into consideration particularly in this revisional petition. ( 6 ) IN this petition, I am only concerned whether the Trial Court acted legally in allowing the amendment application. ( 7 ) IT has been laid down by Kerala High Court in the case of Madhavi v. Timpran, (1987) 3 Crimes at page 183, that proceedings under Section 125 of the Code are not punitive. It is not a criminal proceeding at all. It serves a social purpose and only prescribes an alternative Forum to get relief. Though the section appears in Criminal Procedure Code but it remains a proceeding of civil nature. It is not a criminal proceeding at all. It serves a social purpose and only prescribes an alternative Forum to get relief. Though the section appears in Criminal Procedure Code but it remains a proceeding of civil nature. Enquiries therein are only quasi criminal in nature. For all practical purpose is the pleadings in a proceeding under Section 125, Cr. P. C. are like pleadings in a civil case and the pleadings can be amended in appropriate circumstances. ( 8 ) I entirely agree, with respect with the observation of the learned Single Judge of Kerala High Court and hold that the Trial Court committed no error of jurisdiction in allowing the amendment application. This petition has, therefore, no force and the same is dismissed.