Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77991 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1993 of 2025 Revisionist :- Pramod Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Harendra Yadav 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 record. The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to set aside the judgment and order dated 05.03.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghazipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.104 of 2018 (Pushpapal and others Vs. Pramod Pal), under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no.2 is wife of the revisionist and opposite party nos.3 to 5 are minor children. He further submits that the opposite party no.2 is living separate from the revisionist without any sufficient reason and is claiming maintenance. Learned trial court has passed the order dated 05.03.2025 for her interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3000/- per month to the wife and Rs. 1000/- to her each three minor children from the date of application. In total Rs. 6000/- per month as interim maintenance. He further submits that the revisionist has no any source of income but lives in the house of grand father (Nana) and working as labour to maintain himself. Rs. 6000/- per month as maintenance to the wife and three minor children is excessive and beyond his paying capacity. He further submits that the wife and children are living in his paternal house with his father with whom there is illicit relation as he mentioned in his objection filed before the learned trial court. He further submits that the order passed by the learned trial court for interim maintenance cannot be said to be based on the material on record, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by the learned trial court and allow the revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order passed by learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party nos.2 to 5 are wife and three minor children of the revisionist to whom he neglected to maintain, as a result she started living in her maika and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The father of the revisionist made compromise and was ready to bequest the land in favour of his grand sons and to maintain the daughter-in-law and to keep her in his house. Again the opposite party no.2 was ill treated by the revisionist and she went back to her maternal house. The revisionist in his objection made absurd allegations against his father without any proof. Since, revisionist is not maintaining his wife and three minor children though he is able bodied person, therefore, under legal obligation to maintain them. The learned trial court has fixed the amount for interim maintenance of Rs. 3000/- in favour of the wife and Rs.1000/- for each child cannot be said to be excessive and more than sufficient. Therefore, there appears no illegality in the order passed by the trial court and requires no interference by this Court. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Mini Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad