Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30689 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1282 of 2023 Revisionist :- Rinku Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Amit Bhardwaj,Amar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sangeeta Singh Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Amar Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State and Ms. Simijta holding brief of Ms. Sangeeta Singh for private opposite parties. 2. It is noticed that the dispute between the parties was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre but failure report has been received. 3. Present criminal revision under Section 19 (4) of Family Court Act, 1984 has been filed against order dated 6.7.2023 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No.2, Sitapur in Crl. Misc. Case No.808 of 2019 in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby the maintenance at the rate of Rs.2000/- per month to opposite party No.2 who is wife of the revisionist and Rs.1000/- to opposite party No.3, who is daughter of the revisionist has been awarded. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the revisionist and perused the record. 5. It is noticed that there are allegations of demand of dowry by the revisionist which could not be fulfilled by family members of opposite party No.2 and consequently she was mentally and physically harassed and finally she was compelled to leave her matrimonial home and started living separately. In the aforesaid circumstances, she has moved application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. 6. The revisionist had appeared in the proceedings and opposed the application where after due consideration of the objection, the impugned order has been passed granting maintenance in favour of the private respondents. 7. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order nor with the quantum of the maintenance. Apart from the above, there are cogent reasons for the private respondents to have started living separately. The revisionist being husband and father is duty bound to maintain them failing which the applicaditon under Section 125 Cr.P.C. would be maintainable. 8. In view of the above, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The revision being bereft of merits is dismissed. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 22.5.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench