HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2910 of 2024 Court No. - 89 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record 2.This criminal revision under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 02.03.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sant Kabir Nagar, in Application No. 5- Kha filed in Case No. 296/11/2021 (Smt. Baby Maddheshiya and Another vs. Pankaj Kumar), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Basira, District Sant Kabir Nagar, whereby the revisionist has been directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month as maintenance to opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance to opposite party no. 3 from the date of the application. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the amount awarded by the learned Trial Court is excessive. He further stated that the revisionist is working as an LIC agent, his income is very low, and he is not in a position to pay the amount awarded by the Trial Court. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submitted that, considering the prevailing inflation and cost of living, the amount awarded by the Trial Court cannot be said to be excessive. 5. It is an admitted fact that opposite party no. 2 is the legally wedded wife of the revisionist and opposite party no. 3 is their minor son. The application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is still pending before the Trial Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Anand Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, G.A., Rashmi Upadhyay Pankaj Kumar .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Court for final adjudication, where the revisionist will have the opportunity to file his objections, and on that basis, the Trial Court will decide the final amount of maintenance. The present order relates only to interim maintenance granted on the basis of prima facie evidence considered by the Trial Court. 6.In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the interim maintenance awarded cannot be said to be excessive. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the revisionist has no leg to stand on. 7. Accordingly, the revision is dismissed. October 13, 2025 pks CRLR No. 2910 of 2024 2 (Madan Pal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad