Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113359 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1034 of 2025 Revisionist :- Kamaluddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Mohammad Azad Khan,Prabhav Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abrar Ahmad,G.A.,Himanshu Shukla,Narendra Mohan,Shiksha Shukla Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned counsel for the opposite party alongwith learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to allow the revision and to set aside the impugned final order dated 12.12.2024 passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by the court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Saharanpur in Criminal Case No.95/2019 (Zahida alias Shaba and another vs. Kamaluddin) whereby the maintenance application of opposite parties has been allowed and the present revisionist has been directed to pay maintenance amount of Rs.9000/- per month to the applicant no.1, Mrs., Zahida alias Shaba and Rs.9000/- per month to the applicant no.2, Mohd. Kaif till he attains adulthood i.e a total of Rs.18,000/- per month from the date of filing of application. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no.2 and opposite party no.3 are wife and minor son of the revisionist. Further submitted that opposite party no.2 was married to him in the year 2011 but without any sufficient reason she started living separate from him from the year 2017 with minor child. When she did not agree to live with the revisionist, he pronounced talak and entered into second marriage and he has two children from the second wife. He further submits that the revisionist is an employee in railway and gets gross salary Rs.63803/- per month and after deductions net salary is Rs.40,210/- out of which learned trial court has fixed the amount of interim maintenance Rs.9000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs.9000/- per month in favour of minor son, total Rs.18,000/- per month which is in excess and disproportionate to the income of the revisionist, therefore, request to reduce the amount of interim maintenance and allow the revision. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case opposite party no.2 is the first wife who was subjected to harassment by the revisionist. She was being beaten by the revisionist that was the reason she started living separate from him in compulsion. The revisionist never gave her any amount of money for her maintenance and the minor child. She is an unemployed lady having no source of income either to support herself or her minor child. He also submits that the mother of the revisionist also gets pension and his brother also lives separate from him. There is no other liability on the revisionist except his second wife and children from her. The house which was bought in the name of opposite party no.2 is on loan, the amount of loan is also not being paid by the revisionist but it is being paid by the father of the opposite party no.2. In this way, there is no any additional liability on the revisionist. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that opposite party nos.2 & 3 are wife and minor child of the revisionist who are living separate from him due to sufficient reason and neglect on his part. Out of net salary Rs.40,210/- per month Rs.9000/- per month in favour of wife cannot be said to be more than 25% of his net salary and Rs.9000/- per month in favour of minor child can also not be said to be excessive since he is aged about 13 years and huge expenses are borne by the opposite party no.2 on his maintenance and education. In this way, the amount of maintenance in favour of minor child can also not be said to be excessive. Thus, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court dated 12.12.2024 but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal revision is, hereby, dismissed. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad