HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 862 of 2025 Court No. - 84 HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 22.01.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Prayagraj in Case No. 911 of 2022 (Smt. Sheelu Vs. Amit Kumar), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Puramufti, District Prayagraj. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the opposite party no. 2 is husband of the revisionist. Due to neglect, she is living apart from him and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which was decided by the learned trial court vide order dated 22.1.2025 fixing the amount of maintenance Rs. 2000/- per month that is insufficient to maintain herself, therefore, request to set aside the order and increase the amount. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G. A. opposed the prayer and contended that he is working in a mobile shop and gets about Rs. 10,000/- per month and has no any other source of income. Revisionist/wife herself is B.A.B.Ed. qualified and is able to maintain herself by earning. The amount fixed by the learned trial court cannot be said to be less than sufficient but it is sufficient. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. perusal of Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Kaushal Kishore Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Avinash Chandra Srivastava, G.A. Smt. Sheelu Gautam .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) record and order passed by learned trial court, it appears that the amount of maintenance Rs. 2000/- in favour of wife is insufficient and meager. The opposite party no. 2 gets about Rs. 10,000/- per month as admitted and also able bodied person, therefore, he is under legal obligation to maintain his wife and learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 2000/- per month in favour of wife that is insufficient for her maintenance and meager. In considered opinion of this Court, the amount Rs. 2000/- fixed in favour of wife for maintenance is liable to be increased. Thus the amount of maintenance is increased from Rs. 2000/- per month to Rs. 4000/- per month from the date of application. The present revision is partly allowed at the admission stage itself. The amount received by the wife as interim maintenance or maintenance in the present case or in any other case shall be subject to adjustment in the present amount. September 19, 2025 Anurag Singh CRLR No. 862 of 2025 2 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad