Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5491 of 2024 Revisionist :- Akram Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Pratibha Vohra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record. This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Court No.III, District Jaunpur in Criminal Misc. Case No.323 of 2019 (Shabnam and others Vs. Akram Ali), under section 125 Cr.P.C, P.S Sujanganj, District Jaunpur. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that the learned trial court has passed the order dated 29.7.2024 on the application under Section 125 Cr.P. C filed by the opposite parties No.2,3 and 4 by which the learned trial court has awarded the maintenance in favour of the opposite party No.2, wife of revisionist Rs.3000/- per month and two minor daughters Rs.1000/- each. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party No.2, wife of the revisionist, is living separately from him with two minor daughters without any reasonable excuse. She herself misbehaved and filed this application against the revisionist. It is further submitted that the matter was referred to the mediation centre and the matter was settled between them and she went with the revisionist but in the way some dispute arose and she did not come with him. It is also submitted that the revisionist earns Rs.13,000/- per month while working in Ahmadabad out of which Rs.5000/- are to be given to the wife and two minor daughters which is in excess. The learned trial court did not consider the liabilities of the revisionist but allowed the application while fixing the amount as aforesaid which is in excess and cannot be said to be reasonable, therefore, request to set aside the impugned order and allow this revision. Learned counsel for opposite party as well as learned A.G.A opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the revisionist is an abled person and neglected his wife to maintain that was the reason she is living in her Mayaka with her two minor daughters and the amount fixed by the learned trial court cannot be said to be in excess as Rs.3000/- given to the wife and Rs.1000/- for each to two minor daughters that can not be said to be more than sufficient for their needs, therefore, no relief can be given to the revisionist. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A for the State, perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the impugned order passed by the learned trial court, therefore, it does not require any interference by this Court. So far as the amount awarded for maintenance Rs.3000/- to the wife cannot be said to be in excess and likewise the amount of Rs.1000/- for each to two minor daughters can also not be said to be in excess, as a result this Court is not inclined to reduce the amount of maintenance awarded to the wife and two minor daughters but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this revision is dismissed. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 G.S Digitally signed by :- GHAN SHYAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad