ARVIND KUMAR SINGH @ SUNNY v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
CRLR/750/2025 · 2025-05-19
Subhash Chandra Sharma
Civil Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12568 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12568 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84722 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 750 of 2025 Revisionist :- Arvind Kumar Singh @ Sunny Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Salil Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been moved with prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 12.12.2024 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.2, Aligarh in Maintenance Petition (Case) No.1087 of 2023 (Smt. Gudiya vs. Arvind Kumar Singh) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh thereby the maintenance case of the revisionist has been partly allowed to the extent that the maintenance amount which awarded by the learned trial court be enhanced under the facts and circumstances of the present case. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case opposite party no.2 is wife and was married in the year 2020. No any demand of dowry or harassment was made either by the revisionist or other members of his family. Further submitted that the opposite party no.2 started misbehaving with the revisionist just after marriage. The allegation made by opposite party no.2 that she was expelled from her matrimonial house when she was pregnant is totally false. When she was pregnant better treatment was provided to her even though pregnancy could not be saved. She herself went to her maika and started living there without any sufficient reason. The revisionist works in private company and makes earning of Rs.16,941/- but now he is unemployed. He is not a software engineer and made no such statement before the marriage. He completed B.C.A. for the private job. There is no any other property in his name except the house in the name of his father. The opposite party no.2 runs beauty parlor and makes income and is able to maintain herself.
The learned trial court has not considered all these facts while deciding the application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. and fixing the amount of maintenance Rs.6000/- per month from the date of application which is excessive and beyond
the paying capacity of the revisionist/husband, therefore, request to set aside the order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the learned trial court and reduce the amount and also divide the amount of arrears of maintenance into easy installments. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party no.2 is wedded wife of the revisionist and is living apart from him with sufficient cause as she was being ill-treated and neglected in her matrimonial house even during the period of her pregnancy. There is nothing on record to show that she runs beauty parlor and making income and she is able to maintain herself but she is dependent on her parents. On the other hand, the revisionist is able bodied person and worked private job in Quess Corporation Ltd. and was receiving salary Rs.14,741/- per month as per the pay slip for the month of September, 2024 which shows that he is capable of making income. The revisionist has himself stated before the learned court that there is no any other liability on him except the wife and his father is pensioner so it can also not be said that he is dependent on him. In this way, the amount of Rs.6000/- per month in favour of wife as maintenance cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient, therefore, the order dated 12.12.2024 does not warrant any interference by this Court. However, it is directed that the revisionist shall make payment of amount arrears of maintenance in 18 equal installments alongwith the current amount of maintenance.
Accordingly, this criminal revision is, hereby, disposed of at the admission stage itself. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad