JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Mr. A. Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The respondent filed a case under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. claiming the maintenance against the husband, the petitioner herein. Though the petitioner herein raised certain objection about the legality of the marriage, but it is an admitted position that the petition filed by the petitioner for nullity of the marriage has been dismissed by the family court. However, the petitioner has preferred the appeal against the said judgment and order which is reportedly still pending. The respondent in the petition for maintenance being Misc. case No.288 of 2012 has stated that for unbearable cruelty she had to leave the matrimonial home and according to her, 'the petitioner earns a sum of Rs.20,000/- from his business.' 3. Mr. A. Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent could not prove that aspect relating to the income. However, by the impugned judgment the family court has returned a finding that the petitioner has been earning 'through tuition and other source'. According to Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel that the pleaded case of the respondent could not be proved. No maintenance allowance ought to have been given. Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel has further insisted upon this court to hold that 'tuition and other source' cannot be treated as business as pleaded by the respondent. This court is unable to accept such proposition for etymological variation. The maintenance allowance to the extent of Rs.3,000/- is very modest and the petitioner is under both moral and legal obligation to provide such maintenance to his legally married wife inasmuch as the status that the respondent is the legally married wife has not been proved contrary. 4. As a result, this court does not find any merit in this case and hence is liable to be dismissed. However, before parting with the record, it is observed that if the marital status of the respondent is anyway inferred otherwise by a legal process or for change in the circumstances, the petitioner may approach the family court for alteration of the order under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. 5. In the result, this petition is dismissed. LCRs be returned forthwith.