Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77775 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 656 of 2025 Revisionist :- Buddh Vilas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Raj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to set aside the judgment and order dated 30.11.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Chitrakoot in Criminal Case No.465 of 2023 (Pintu Devi Vs. Buddh Vilas), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Bahilpurwa, District Chitrakoot. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the wife/opposite party no.2 is G.N.M. diploma holder and is able to earn money, therefore, she is able to maintain herself. On the other hand, the revisionist is an unemployed person and makes no income except by working as a labourer. The opposite party no.2 is living separately from him without sufficient cause. He further submits that he has spent money on her education and when she completed her G.N.M. diploma, she filed a suit for divorce and also an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Learned trial court has also fixed the amount of Rs.2500/- per month as maintenance in favour of the opposite party no.2. The amount so fixed is excessive and beyond paying capacity of the revisionist, therefore, request to reduce the amount and allow the revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order passed by learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party no.2 entered into marriage with the revisionist in the year 2012 and later on due to neglect on the part of the revisionist, she started living in her Maiyka. He gave nothing for her maintenance. Though, as per submissions of revisionist, she is G.N.M. diploma holder but there is nothing on record to show that she is working as Nurse anywhere and making income, therefore, only on the basis of her qualification, she cannot be said to be able to maintain herself. On the other hand, revisionist is B.C.A. and able bodied person. He is duty bound to maintain his wife and Rs. 2500/- per month cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient but it is meager amount for a person to maintain. In considered opinion of this Court, the finding recorded by the learned trial court cannot be said to be against the material available on record but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Mini Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad