HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Revision No.924 of 2024 Vikas Tyagi ………Revisionist Versus Smt. Shivani Tyagi ………Respondent Mr. Sachin Panwar, Advocate for the revisionist. Mr. Neeraj Garg, Advocate for the respondent. Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral) This revision is directed against the order dated 26.11.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, District Dehradun, in Criminal Case No.475 of 2023, Smt. Shivani Tyagi vs. Vikas Tyagi, whereby, the interim maintenance application under moved by the respondent-Smt. Shivani Tyagi, herein, was partly allowed against the revisionist by directing him to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month to the respondent and his daughter from the date of filing of the application i.e. 08.12.2023. 2. The facts of the case are that the marriage of the revisionist was solemnized with respondent no.2 on 09.07.2005 as per Hindu rites. But after some time of marriage, the matrimonial discord arose between the parties. Thereafter, an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the respondent for interim maintenance. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit that the revisionist had neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the respondent. The respondent-Smt. Shivani Tyagi is living separately in her parental house with her own 1 consent without any rhyme and reason and upon repeated requests, she did not come back to her matrimonial house. The revisionist and respondent no. 2 are married to each other and out of their conjugal relations, a girl child was born. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that after some time of their marriage, the revisionist and his family members have demanded dowry from the respondent and upon non fulfillment of demand of dowry, they have harassed and victimized the respondent. Initially, just to save her matrimonial life, the respondent did not disclose the said fact to anyone, however, due to the atrocities of revisionist- husband, she was constrained to leave her matrimonial house. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the trial court awarded an amount of Rs.25,000/- for the maintenance to the respondent no.2 and her child from the date of filing of the application. In the opinion of this Court, there is hardly any ground to interfere with the aforesaid order. 6. The income of the revisionist has been stated to be about Rs.2.00 lakh per month. Besides this, he is also having several properties in village and in town. Hence, the interim maintenance @Rs.1.00 lakh per month was claimed. 7. The revisionist filed his objection to the said application, in which, he stated that he works in a private company from where, he hardly earns his both ends meals. He has also responsibility of his old father and he has no 2 immovable property. The child born begotten of the matrimonial relationship i.e. Km. Nandini Tyagi is also stated to be suffering from Autism. Hence, considering the nature of case, status of parties and the source of earning, the court awarded interim maintenance @Rs.25,000/- per month to the respondent no.2 from the revisionist from the date of filing of application, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the well reasoned order. 8. The revision lacks merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. The trial Court is however directed to expedite the proceedings of the case filed u/s 125 Cr.P.C. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 23.07.2025 Ravi 3