HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 934 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard Sri Praveen Chandra, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, learned State Law Officer as well as perused the record. 2. By means of the instant revision filed under Section 19(4) of Family Court Act, the revisionist has assailed the final order dated 11.07.2025 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.3, Lucknow (in short 'Family Court') in Case No.1168 of 2024 (Ritu Shukla Vs. Pankaj Kumar Shukla) u/s 125 Cr.P.C. 3. Vide order dated 11.07.2025, the Family Court directed the revisionist to pay Rs.10,000/- per month as interim maintenance to opposite party no.2. The order has been challenged on the ground that opportunity to file an affidavit in terms of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324 was not provided by the Family Court. 4. At this stage, on being asked regarding the status of revisionist, learned counsel for the revisionist says that the revisionist is discharging the duties on the post of Sub-Inspector in U.P. Police as he was appointed in terms of Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 and he is earning about Rs.60,000/- per moth. He also says that in terms of oral settlement, the revisionist is under obligation to pay Rs.50,000/- of the salary to his younger brother, however, to establish the fact that 50% of the salary has been provided to the younger brother by the revisionist, no document has been placed. 5. It is to be noted that learned counsel for the revisionist failed to point out any illegality in the order under challenge for the reason that the Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Arun Kumar Singh, Nitin Rastogi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pankaj Kumar Shukla .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) amount awarded, i.e. Rs.10,000/- per month is less than 25% of the income of the revisionist, i.e. Rs.60,000/- per month. 6. Considering the aforesaid which includes that the amount awarded towards maintenance by the Family Court to the respondent, i.e. Rs.10,000/- per month is less than 25% of income of the revisionist i.e. Rs.60,000/- per month, this Court is not inclined to cause interference in the impugned order dated 11.07.2025. 7. The instant revision is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. 8. The copy of the order be sent to the trial court concerned forthwith. August 28, 2025 Anand/- CRLR No. 934 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench