Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89092 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1458 of 2024 Revisionist :- Sunil Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Gyanedra Pratap Singh,Manish Prajapati Counsel for Opposite Party :- Brijesh Kumar Yadav,G.A.,Prem Nath Chauhan with Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1502 of 2025 Revisionist :- Poonam And Anothers Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Brijesh Kumar Yadav,Prem Nath Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manish Prajapati Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The Criminal Revision No. 1458 of 2024 has been filed with a prayer to allow the present revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 06.01.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonbhadra in Criminal Misc. Case No. 376 of 2020 (Poonam and another Vs. Sunil Kumar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra. The Criminal Revision No. 1502 of 2025 has been filed with a prayer to allow the present criminal revision and modify the judgement & order dated 06.01.2024 passed by Principal Judge Family Court, Sonbhadra in Criminal Misc. Cases/376/2020 (Poonam and another Vs. Sunil Kumar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra and direct the opposite party no. 2 Sunil Kumar to pay the total amount Rs. 2,6,000/- from the date of application dated 19.06.2018 to the revisionist and further pray to direct the opposite party no. 2 Sunil Kumar to pay the amount Rs. 3,000/- per month to revisionist no. 1 and Rs. 2,000/- per month to the revisionist no. 2 in pursuance of the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court regularly and also opposite party may be directed to pay the amount Rs. 30,000 per month to the revisionist no. 1 and her minor daughter namely Pari from the date of filing the application. Since both the revisions arise from the same judgment and order therefore are being heard and decided together. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in Criminal Revision No. 1458 of 2024 the opposite party no. 2 is wife and opposite party no. 3 is minor daughter who is living separate from him without any sufficient reason. He also submits that the revisionist worked as a labourer in Shalimar company and during the Covid period his job came to an end and now he is working on a cloth shop and earns Rs. 7,000/- per month as wages. He has no any other income or property to make earning. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 3,000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs. 2,000/- per month in favour of minor daughter. This amount is in excess and beyond paying capacity of the husband. He also submits that the wife holds Post Graduate Diploma in Management (PGDM) and is able to make income and maintain herself whereas the revisionist is only B.COM and have no any professional qualification. Learned counsel for the opposite party opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in Criminal Revision No. 1502 of 2025 the amount fixed by the learned trial court as maintenance in favour of wife and minor daughter is less than sufficient and disproportionate to the income of the opposite party/husband who is earning Rs. 80,000/- by working in Shalimar company as Assistant Manager in Finance Department though no any certificate could be availed by him in R.T.I. Since the husband is able bodied person and is under legal obligation to maintain his wife and minor daughter who is living separate from him with sufficient reason, therefore, he is to provide money for maintenance of wife and minor daughter. Learned trial court did not consider all these facts and fixed the amount of maintenance as aforesaid, therefore, request to set aside the order and increase the amount of maintenance. 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. and perusal of record, the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 are wedded wife and minor daughter of the revisionist those are living separate from him due to neglect. There is no any material on record to show that wife has sufficient means to maintain herself and her minor daughter though she is PGDM i.e. Post Graduate Diploma in Management. Only on the basis of professional education she cannot be said to have sufficient means to maintain herself. On the other hand, the revisionist/husband is B.COM and worker in private company but there is no any material on record to show that he makes certain income. He is able bodied person and under obligation to maintain his wife and minor daughter, therefore, the amount Rs. 3,000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs. 2,000/- per month in favour of minor daughter, total Rs. 5,000/- per month cannot be said to be disproportionate to the income of the husband where certain income is not established. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order dated 06.01.2024 passed by the learned trial court but both the revisions are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, these criminal revisions are, hereby, dismissed. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad