Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115594 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 6246 of 2024 Revisionist :- Rahul Singh Parmar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ajay Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lavkush Kumar Shukla Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. This criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and quash the order dated 06.09.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Agra, in Case No. 2102 of 2022 (Smt. Pratima Sikarwar Vs. Rahul Singh Parmar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Achnera, District Agra and further prays to stay the effect and operation of the aforesaid order. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case opposite party no. 2 is wife and without any sufficient reason living separate from him in her maika. She filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. with an application for interim maintenance which was allowed by the learned trial court by order dated 06.09.2024 fixing the amount of interim maintenance Rs. 4,000/- per month. He also submits that the revisionist is an unemployed person and have no any regular income, therefore he is unable to make payment of the aforesaid amount and this amount is liable to be reduced and be made payable from the date of order on the place of date of application. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case due to neglect of the revisionist, the wife/opposite party no. 2 is living apart from him in her maika. She has no parents but is living with her grandmother. She has no any source of income to maintain herself. The revisionist is able bodied person and works in a hospital. The amount Rs. 4,000/- per month in favour of wife cannot be said to be more than sufficient and beyond paying capacity of the husband. There is no any illegality in the order. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court dated 06.09.2024, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court and does not warrant any interference by this Court. So far as the recovery of arrears of the amount of maintenance is concerned that is from the date of application to the date of order it will be just and proper to divide the amount of arrears of maintenance into ten equal installments those are to be paid month to month with the current amount of maintenance. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad