Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17029 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 196 of 2025 Revisionist :- Rajesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Kartikay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Kartikay Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the opposite parties. 2. By means of present criminal revision under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984, the revisionist has challenged the order dated 22.11.2024 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court-II, Barabanki in Criminal Case No. 374 of 2021 - Ramrati Vs. Rajesh, under Section 125 Cr.P.C.. 3. Opposite party no. 2 in her application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has stated that the revisionist and the opposite party no. 2 were married according to the Hindu Rites and Rituals on 11.05.2015 and after marriage the opposite party no. 2 started living her the revisionist. It was stated that at the time of marriage father of the complainant/opposite party no. 2 had given dowry according to his status and financial resources, but the revisionist continued to demand Rs.50,000/- and motorcycle as additional dowry. Out of the said wedlock a girl child was also born and it if on 24.11.2020, that the complainant was abused and physically tortured and was forced to vacate her matrimonial home and from then she started living with her parents. After some counseling the complainant/opposite party no. 2 again started living with the revisionist and again when she was physically and mentally harassed on 04.01.2021, she was again forcefully evicted from her matrimonial home as additional demand of dowry could not be fulfilled. 4. The complainant in addition to application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has also lodged a first information report under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the revisionist. 5. In the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., notices were issued to the revisionist, who had put in appearance and opposed the said application. Grievance of complainant was that the revisionist is earning a very paltry sum and is not able to afford good life to the complainant and it was further stated that she has deserted her matrimonial home voluntarily and accordingly, opposed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. 6. The trial Court after considering rival contentions was of the considered view that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the revisionist and complainant are husband and wife and that there was certain demand for dowry. There is no dispute that the complainant was harassed on account of demand of additional dowry and she was evicted from her matrimonial home and in the aforesaid circumstances, allowed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.3000/- and Rs.2000/- respectively to the complainant and her daughter from the date of application till the date of order and an amount of Rs.3000/- and Rs.5000/- for future from the date of passing of said order. 7. The revisionist has assailed the said order dated 22.11.2024 in the present revision. 8. It is in the proceedings before this Court it was proposed that there are chances of mediation and the revisionist was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.30,000/- before this Court within two weeks. The order sheet indicates that revisionist had deposited the said amount on 24.02.2025. Notices were issued to opposite party no. 2, which according to the office report dated 10.03.2025, have been served personally on opposite party no. 2 and through mother of opposite party no. 3. Despite service, neither opposite party nos. 2 and 3 nor their counsel has put in appearance before this Court. 9. On account of non appearance of private opposite parties, this Court finds that they are not ready and willing to participate in the mediation proceedings and settle the dispute through mediation and accordingly, this Court proceeds to decide present revision on its merit. 10. The revisionist is ready and willing to keep the private opposite parties with him and due to the fact that he is working as labourer and does not have financial capacity to pay the amount awarded by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court-II, Barabanki as per order dated 22.11.2024. 11. Apart from the aforesaid submissions, no other ground has been urged by learned counsel for the revisionist. 12. This Court has perused the record and heard rival contentions. Without repeating the facts it is noticed that the trial Court has considered the submissions as well as record in great detail and had formulated five issues. All the issues were decided in favour of private opposite parties and accordingly it was found that opposite parties were entitled for grant of maintenance. 13. Mere fact that revisionist is ready and willing to keep his wife and daughter alongwith him, cannot be a ground for setting aside the order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The intention and bonafide of the revisionist has to be looked into before any such order can be modified or varied in his favour. In the present case there are serious allegations of mental and physical torture of the complainant at the hands of revisionist. It is noticed that on two occasions the complainant was evicted from her matrimonial home after physically and mentally torturing her. This aspect of the matter was also considered by the trial Court and it was found that due to demand of dowry the complainant was mentally and physically tortured and she is living with her three year old daughter with her parents. 14. Accordingly, this Court do not find that prayer made by the revisionist that he is ready and willing to keep the private opposite parties with him, in the aforesaid circumstances, any directions can be passed to opposite party no. 2 to co-habitat with the revisionist. 15. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The present criminal revision being devoid of merit is dismissed. 16. The amount of Rs.30,000/- deposited by revisionist before this Court shall be transmitted to the Court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court-II, Barabanki forthwith and same shall be released in favour of opposite party nos. 2 and 3 on their application being made for the same before the trial Court, and adjusted towards the amount of maintenance to be paid by the revisionist to opposite party no. 2. 17. The Senior Registrar of this Court shall ensure transmission of aforesaid amount to the trial Court. Order Date :- 24.3.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench