Full Judgment
2. From perusal of the entire order dated 14.2.2011, I do not find any illegality or irregularity therein.
3. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that lenient view may be taken by vacating the order, by which salary of the petitioner has been attached because the petitioner has to take care of his ailing mother and that on account of financial constraints, he could not pay the ad interim monthly maintenance to his wife and daughter within time, yet, he is inclined to pay the arrears in instalment and to keep his wife and daughter with him with all humility and honour.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, attachment of the salary of the petitioner Sanjay Kumar by order dated 14.2.2011 shall be put in abeyance till further order, subject to payment of Rs.50,000/- in lump sum positively by 16th of June, 2011, failing to which appropriate order shall be passed against him. The petitioner is directed to deposit the said amount before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Maintenance Case No.75/2009 with the liberty to the opposite party No.2 to receive the amount on her behalf and on behalf of her minor daughter opposite party No.3 herein. Accordingly, I.A. No.907 of 2011 stands disposed of.
(Cr.M.P. No.602 of 2010)
6. Let this petition be put up on 20 th of June, 2011 facilitating the parties for reconciliation.