JUDGMENT 1. - The instant misc. petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 8.4.2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Bikaner in Case No. 522/2012, whereby, the learned Judge, Family Court, Bikaner awarded 30 days' imprisonment to the petitioner towards non payment of Rs. 16,000/- of maintenance dues. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was directed to make payment of maintenance to the respondents who are his children and wife. The petitioner was not in a position to make the payment of maintenance. The respondents filed an application for the recovery of the maintenance arrears to the tune of Rs. 78,500/-. The learned Judge, Family Court, Bikaner directed issuance of a warrant of arrest against the petitioner to serve out imprisonment for a period of 30 days towards the non payment of Rs. 16,000/- of maintenance dues. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the note appended on the warrant of arrest, whereby, the learned Judge, Family Court, Bikaner specified that the petitioner shall suffer 30 days' imprisonment and thereafter shall be reproduced in the Court upon his depositing the said amount. Learned counsel submits that the recovery warrant was issued for a sum of Rs. 78,500/-. Thus, the learned Trial Court was not justified in segregating the amount of Rs. 16,000/- and directing the petitioner's arrest for the said amount only. Learned counsel submits that the order dated 8.4.2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Bikaner, whereby, the petitioner has been directed to serve out separate imprisonment for a period of 30 days for the specified sum of Rs. 16,000/- deserves to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to dispute the fact that the application for recovery which was moved on behalf of the respondents was for a total amount of Rs. 78,500/-. 5. From a perusal of the order dated 8.4.2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Bikaner, it is evident that the learned Trial Court observed that the petitioner was unable to make payment of maintenance arrears of Rs. 78,500/-and, thus, he be sent to jail. However, without any reason whatsoever, it has been observed in the order that the petitioner shall suffer 30 days' imprisonment for non payment of the amount of Rs. 16,000/- maintenance dues. The order is obviously ambiguous. 78,500/-and, thus, he be sent to jail. However, without any reason whatsoever, it has been observed in the order that the petitioner shall suffer 30 days' imprisonment for non payment of the amount of Rs. 16,000/- maintenance dues. The order is obviously ambiguous. The learned Trial Court has not mentioned any reason as to why a specified sum of Rs. 16,000/- was being set apart for awarding 30 days' imprisonment to the petitioner. As the arrears of Rs. 78,500/-were claimed as consolidated lump sum, therefore, the order of imprisonment should have been for that whole amount. 6. In this view of the matter, the misc. petition deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. The order dated 8.4.2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Bikaner, whereby, the learned Judge directed the petitioner to suffer 30 days' imprisonment for non payment of Rs. 16,000/- only is modified. Now, the imprisonment awarded to the petitioner shall be for the whole due amount of Rs. 78,500/-.Stay petition is also disposed of.Petition allowed. *******