Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35803 (ALL)

DR. ANAND MOHAN YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

CRLR/1552/2025 · 2025-09-18

Subhash Chandra Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1552 of 2025 Court No. - 84 HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Nar Singh, Advocate appears for learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the order dated 01.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court-Second, Gorakhpur in Misc. Case No. 830 of 2024 filed in original Criminal Case No. 294 of 2020 (Sangita Yadav Vs. Dr. Anand Mohan Yadav), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Ramgarhtal, District Gorakhpur and further prays to stay the effect and operation of the aforesaid order. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the marriage of the revisionist was performed in the year 2014 with the opposite party no. 2. She was misbehaving the revisionist and also subjecting him to torture and in the year 2020 she left her sasural and went to her maika and since then she is living there without any sufficient cause and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the year 2020 with an application for interim maintenance which was decided by the learned trial court by order dated 01.02.2025 fixing the amount of interim maintenance Rs. 8,000/- per month in favour of wife from the date of application to the date of order and from the date of order Rs. 10,000/- per month as maintenance in favour of wife. He further submits that the revisionist is M.Tech, PhD. degree holder but now he is unemployed and is suffering from illness. There is no any source of income, therefore, he is not able to pay the amount of Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Kashi Nath Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Nar Singh, Poonam Singh Sengar Dr. Anand Mohan Yadav .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) maintenance as fixed by the learned trial court, as a result request to reduce the amount of maintenance. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the revisionist is M.Tech, PhD. degree holder and was working as Director in M.I.E.T. Engineering College, Meerut, U.P. On the other hand, the opposite party no. 2/the wife has no any source of income and due to neglect on the part of the revisionist she is living in her maika under compulsion and no any amount of maintenance was given by the revisionist. The amount as fixed by the learned trial court cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient for the maintenance of wife and there is no illegality or impropriety in the order but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the order passed by the learned trial court dated 01.02.2025, it appears that marriage was performed in the year 2014 and from the year 2020 the opposite party no.2/the wife is living separate from him due to his neglect.The revisionist is well qualified person having M.Tech, PhD. degrees and said to work in M.I.E.T. Engineering College, Meerut, U.P. On the other hand, the opposite party no. 2/ the wife has no any source of income and there is nothing on record to show that she is making any income to maintain herself. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of interim maintenance Rs. 8,000/- per month in favour of wife from the date of application to the date of order and from the date of order Rs. 10,000/- per month as maintenance in favour of wife which cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court dated 01.02.2025 but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed. September 19, 2025 Suraj Srivastav CRLR No. 1552 of 2025 2 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad