Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 768 of 2025 Revisionist :- Ayesha Parveen And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Lalji Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J. Heard Shri Lalji Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned AGA. The sole argument advanced by learned counsel for the revisionists is that the income of the respondent no. 2 is Rs. 10,00,000/- per month, but without considering the same the meager amount of maintenance of Rs. 2,500/- has been awarded to the applicant no. 1 from the date of application and Rs. 3500 from the date of the order and Rs. 1500 to the applicant no.2 from the date of application and Rs. 2,000/-from the date of order, whereas perusal of the impugned order indicates that no documentary evidence was filed by the revisionists. On a query being put, learned counsel or the revisionists also failed to indicate any document or evidence showing the aforesaid income of the respondent no. 2. In view of above, the grounds taken are misconceived and this revision lacks merit. The revision has been filed on misconceived and baseless grounds. The revision is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Raj Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench