Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:48407 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1520 of 2025 Revisionist :- Navi Hasan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Hemant Sharma,Madan Mohan Yaduvanshi,Saurabh Kumar 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 material on record. This criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the present revision and set aside the order dated 01.02.2025 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Hathras in Case No. 57 of 2021 (Smt Rajo @ Rizwana and another Vs. Navi Hasan), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Chandpa, District Hathras by which learned trial court has awarded the amount of maintenance Rs. 3,500/- in favour of his wife and Rs. 3,500/- in favour of minor child. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case he is always ready and willing to keep his wife and child with him but she is not willing to come and live with him. He never neglected to maintain her and the child but she lives separately from him without any reasonable excuse. The learned trial court did not consider all these facts but passed the order in question while allowing the maintenance as aforesaid which cannot be said to be legal and appropriate, therefore, request to set it aside and allow the revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. On considering the facts and circumstances, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the order passed by learned trial court, it appears that opposite party no. 2 is wife of the revisionist and opposite party no. 3 his child. They are living separately from him. The learned trial court has recorded its finding in Para 11 of the order in which the revisionist has admitted in cross-examination that he has married second time from Khurja and he has a son and daughter from his second wife. He also stated that he does not remember as to when he married Smt. Rajo @ Rizwana and also does not remembers his son's name. It shows that the opposite party has a reasonable excuse to live separately from the revisionist as there being second wife and children of the revisionist. The learned trial court has considered all these facts and recorded the finding in this regard. In this way, it cannot be said that the wife is living from her husband without any reasonable excuse since revisionist is husband and neglected to maintain his wife and children, therefore, he is under legal obligation to maintain them. So far as the question relates to the amount of maintenance which is said to be excess, it is to note that Rs. 3,500/- to wife and 3,500/- to minor son cannot be said to be excessive as per status and standard of living of parties. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court but this criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself. Accordingly, this criminal revision is, hereby, dismissed. Order Date :- 5.4.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad