HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5544 of 2024 Court No. - 89 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. 1. Case called out in the revised call. None has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 to press the present revision. Hence this criminal revision is being decided after hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned AGA. 2. This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with prayer to set aside the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court Aligarh, in Case No. 1651 of 2022 (Smt. Kanti Devi Vs. Bhajan Lal), under Section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby the revisionist has been directed to pay maintenance allowances of Rs. 25,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 (wife) from the date of application. 3. The sole argument advanced by learned counsel for the revisionist is that the revisionist is about 83 years of age and has already retired from Government service. He is physically very weak and feeble. It is further submitted that there is a dispute between the two sons of the revisionist and on account of such dispute, the opposite party no.2 in collusion with the elder son of the revisionist has filed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. He next submitted that the amount of maintenance awarded by the trial court of Rs. 25000/- which is not commensurate with the income of the revisionist which is almost 50% of the pension of the revisionist. The amount of maintenance allowance awarded by the trial court in favour of the opposite party no.2 is against the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324 and Kulbhushan Kumar (Dr) v. Raj Kumari, (1970) 3 SCC 129. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist and submits that except the pension revisionist has received gratuity, GPF fund and other retiral benefits and the trial court after considering all aspect of the matter awarded the Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Rajesh Kumar Roy Sharma, Ravi Shanker Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bhajan Lal .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) maintenance allowances of Rs.25000/- cannot be said to be excessive and beyond his capacity but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The short question before this Court is only whether the amount of maintenance allowance awarded by the trial court in favour of the opposite party no.2 is commensurate with the income of the revisionist or not? 7. From a perusal of the judgment, it reflects that in paragraph no. 4 of the impugned judgment, total pension of the revisionist is 46,368/-, however, paragraph no. 37 of the impugned judgment the trial court had calculated the pension of the revisionist for the month of August, 2024 is as Rs. 50,400/-. Since the pension received by the revisionist for the month of August, 2024 is Rs. 50,400/- which is appropriate income of the revisionist, on which the amount of maintenance can be decided. The Hon'ble Apex Court has issued a guidelines for granted maintenance allowance in Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324 and Kulbhushan Kumar (Dr) v. Raj Kumari, (1970) 3 SCC 129, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the maintenance allowances can be granted up to the extent of 25% of the net income of the husband which comes to Rs. 12,500/-. 8. Thus, in view of the above, the Court is of the opinion that the maintenance amount of Rs. 25,000/- awarded by the court below is not commensurate with the income of the revisionist. It is true that it is the legal obligation of the husband to maintain his wife but the amount of maintenance should be commensurate with the income of the husband. Hence the maintenance awarded by the court below seems to be excessive and deserves to be modified, hence it is reduced to Rs. 12,500/- from Rs. 25,000/- per month to the opposite party no.2 (wife) from the date of application. 9. Accordingly, the present criminal revision is partly allowed and the amount of maintenance is reduced to Rs. 12,500/- from Rs. 25,000/- per month from the date of the application. 10. In case, the opposite party no.2 has paid any amount towards the maintenance that shall be adjusted and if any arrears are yet to be paid by the opposite party no. 2, the same shall be paid in ten equal installments. The first installment shall fall due on November 15th, 2025. The rest nine installments will be paid on fifteenth of each calendar month. October 7, 2025/Akbar CRLR No. 5544 of 2024 2 Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKBAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad