Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34262 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 618 of 2025 Revisionist :- Prateek Srivastava Opposite Party :- Smt. Akanksha Srivastava And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Vipul Gupta,Sandeep Kanoujia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for revisionist and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2- State. 2. Notice to opposite party no.1 stand dispensed with. 3. This Criminal Revision has been filed against impugned order dated 22.04.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow in Crl. Misc. Case No.1879 of 2023 (Akanksha Srivastava v. Prateek Srivastava) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby order has been passed for payment of interim maintenance. 4. It has been submitted that the Family Court has erred in fixing monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- in favour of opposite party no.1 while ignoring the fact that revisionist in his objections to application for maintenance had clearly stated that the revisionist had resigned from his job on 13.09.2023 which was accepted and the revisionist was relieved on 28.09.2023 and as such was not employed due to which an exorbitant amount of Rs.10,000/- per month should not have been fixed as monthly maintenance. It is submitted that revisionist and his family members never objected to opposite party no.1 being employed but she remained a house wife of her own volition and could not be made to take advantage of the said fact. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the Application with submission that revisionist has not been able to substantiate his plea of resignation from employment and that the said aspect has very well been discussed in the impugned order. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that by means of impugned order, the Family Court has considered the documents pertaining to Bank Accounts of revisionist which were produced by the revisionist himself and indicates regular deposits in his account with monthly deposit in year 2023-24 of Rs.4,49,440/-; for year 2022-23, a monthly amount of Rs.4,84,570/- and for year 2024-25, a monthly amount of Rs.4,61,180/-. The order also indicates various Fixed Deposits in the Bank Accounts of revisionist. 7. The impugned order thereafter considering the salary slips, has arrived at a conclusion that monthly salary as per documentary evidence is Rs.51,527/- and considering that fact has fixed a monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/-. It is evident that although plea of revisionist being unemployed has been raised in paragraphs 20 and 21 of his objections filed before the Family Court but there is no document to substantiate acceptance of his resignation. An aspect requiring consideration would be whether applicant can take advantage of his own act of resigning from the job particularly when he has not been terminated from service on account of any misdeed of opposite party no.1. 8. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any good ground to grant any indulgence. 9. The revision therefore stands rejected. Order Date :- 3.6.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench