HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5675 of 2024 Court No. - 91 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Mr. Pankaj Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3 and the learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to set aside the interim order dated 19th September, 2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.1, Kanpur Nagar in Case No. 1020 of 2023 (Smt. Rajani Kureel Vs. Anil Kumar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station-Govind Nagar, District- Kanpur Nagar, whereby the trial court while allowing the interim maintnance application filed by opposite party no.2 has directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 12,000/- per month to opposite party no.2 (wife) and Rs. 4,000/- per month each to opposite party nos. 3 (daughter) and 4 (son) (i.e. total Rs. 20,000/- per month) towards interim maintenance allowance from the date of passing of impugned interim order. 3. In the case in hand, it is undisputed fact that the opposite party no.2 is legally wedded wife of the revisionist, whereas opposite party nos. 3 and 4 are real daughter and son of the revisionist respectively. Before the trial court it is also admitted between the parties that the revisionist is working as Junior Engineer in a Central Force of India and is getting Rs. 63,000/- per month as net income. 4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324 has opined that since it is the sacrosanct duty of the husband to provide financial support to the wife, the husband is required to earn money even by physical labour, if he is able-bodied, and cannot not avoid his obligation. 5. Even otherwise, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Gulab Singh, Rahul Mishra, Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pankaj Dubey Anil Kumar .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P Through Secretary (Home) And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Rajnesh (Supra) and Kulbhushan Kumar (Dr) v. Raj Kumari reported in (1970) 3 SCC 129, has observed that the maintenance allowances can be granted up to the extent of 25% of the net income of the husband. The maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic, and avoid either of the two extremes i.e. maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be so extravagant which becomes oppressive and unbearable for the respondent, nor should it be so meagre that it drives the wife to penury. 6. Keeping in view of the income of revisionist as well as guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajnesh and Kulbhushan Kumar (Dr) (Supras), this court is of the considered opinion that the amount of interim maintenance allowance fixed by the court below is not incommensurate as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid cases and 25% of Rs. 63,000/- per month would be total Rs. 15,750/- per month and in round figure Rs.15,000/-. 7. In such circumstances, the total amount of monthly interim maintenance allowance i.e. Rs. 12,000/- per month in favour of opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 4,000/- each in favour of opposite party nos. 3 and 4, as awarded by the trial court under the impugned interim order is excessive and is liable to be reduced. Normally this Court would have remanded the instant matter under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to the trial court for deciding afresh, but looking to the huge pendency before the trial court and also for saving the precious time of the trial court, this Court is proceeding to modify the impugned judgment. 8. Consequently, the impugned interim order dated 19th September, 2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.1, Kanpur Nagar in Case No. 1020 of 2023 (Smt. Rajani Kureel Vs. Anil Kumar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station-Govind Nagar, District-Kanpur Nagar is modified to the extent that now the revisionist shall pay Rs. 10,000/- per month to opposite party no.2 (wife) in place of Rs.12,000/- per month and Rs. 2,500/- per month each to opposite party nos.3 and 4 in place of Rs. 4,000/- per month each towards maintenance allowance from the date of filing of application. 9. The present criminal revision is, accordingly, partly allowed. 10. There shall be no order as to costs. September 19, 2025 Sushil/- CRLR No. 5675 of 2024 2 (Madan Pal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad