Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3433 Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 71 of 2025 Revisionist :- Shahnaz Khatoon Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Avinash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Anshuman Verma, learned A.G.A. Notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that learned court below, without appreciating the material available on record and the evidence led by the parties, has wrongly decided the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the revisionist. A perusal of the record shows that while passing the impugned judgment five issues were framed by the trial court. Issue no.2 was as to whether the defendant has neglected the revisionist. Learned trial court has decided issue no.2 after detailed discussion as well as considering the evidence led by the parties and has concluded in para 34 which is extracted herein below:- "अततः अभभी तक कके ्ቚस्ततुत ससाቌኚय कके उपरसान्त यह भलभीभसााሯतत स्प्ቖ हहो जसातसा हहै तक ्ቚसारररनभी तविपकभी ओ०डब्ललू० 2 सके तबिनसा पयसार्቎ कसारणोሥ सके अपनभी इच्छसानतुससार उससके अलग रह रहभी हहै। क्योሥतक ससाቌኚय सके यह भलभीभसााሯतत ससातबित हहो गयसा हहै तक अगर तविपकभी कके दसारसा उसके ्ቚतसात़በत तकयसा जसातसा तहो उसककी ननौकरभी लगविसानके कके रलए रूपयसा उधसार लकेकर सलमसान कहो नहीሻ तदियसा जसातसा। सलमसान उरर मतुनसा ्ቚसारररनभी वि उसकके तपतसा ए०डब्ललू० 2 सके भलभीभसााሯतत पररतचित हहै। उनकके घर आनसा जसानसा हहै। सलमसान कहो हभी ननौकरभी लगविसानके कके रलए पहैससा तदियसा गयसा हहै। अततः इन सबि तथ्योሥ कहो दिकेखतके हहए पररसस्रततविश सलमसान उरर मतुनसा सके ्ቚसारररनभी ए०डब्ललू० 1 ककी नजदिभीतकयसााሯ ्ቚरम दृ्ቖयसा स्विसाभसातविक ्ቚतभीत हहोतभी हहै और इसरलए ्ቚसारररनभी ए०डब्ललू० तविपकभी ओ०डब्ललू 02 कके ससार जसाकर जभीविनयसापन करनसा नहीሻ चिसाहतभी हहै वि पसााሯचि लसाख रूपयके लकेकर उससके छतु टकसारसा पसानसा चिसाहतभी हहै और गतुजसारसा भभी नहीሻ चिसाहतभी हहै। इस ्ቚकसार तवितनश्चिय तबिन्दितु साሯ० 2 ्ቚसारररनभी कके तविरुद नकसारसात्मक रूप सके तनणቓኍत तकयसा जसातसा हहै।" From perusal of the above, since it has been proved, on the basis of evidence, that the revisionist is residing away from her husband without any sufficient cause; she does not want to go with her husband; rather wants Rs.5,00,000/- from him and also does not want maintenance, thus, learned trial court has rightly decided the issue no.2 and consequently, rejected the application filed by the revisionist under Section 125 Cr.P.C. I do not find any good ground to interfere in the impugned order. The revision, being devoid of merit, is dismissed. Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Renu/- Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench