Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:128750 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2159 of 2025 Revisionist :- Deepika Trivedi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Satya Man Singh,Vidya Dhar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Arun Kumar Bajpai,G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri R.K. Shahu, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal the material on record. This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with prayer to allow this revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 20.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Fatehpur in Case No. 425 of 2023 (Deepika Trivedi Vs. Anand Kumar Shukla), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Khaga, District Fatehpur. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the revisionist is wife of opposite party no. 2 who is living apart from him with sufficient cause and claimed maintenance by filing an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which was decided by the learned trial court vide order dated 20.02.2025 fixing the amount of maintenance Rs. 20,000/- per month in the favour of wife. Further submitted that admittedly the net salary of the opposite party no. 2 is Rs. 89,000/- per month out of which 25% of net salary can be awarded as amount of maintenance but the learned trial court did not consider this fact and fixed the amount of Rs. 20,000/- that is less than 25% of net salary of the husband, therefore, request to increase the amount of maintenance. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case, the learned trial court has fixed the amount after considering the net salary of the husband and also his personal liabilities of the expenses on him and members of his family. Further contended that learned trial court has fixed the amount of Rs. 20,000/- per month that is sufficient for maintenance of revisionist, wife who is living alone having no any issue till now. The amount of maintenance is given for subsistence of the wife but not for leading a luxurious life, in this way, the amount so fixed by the learned trial court is sufficient and order passed by learned trial court is not erroneous. On 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 order passed by learned trial court, it appears that the grievance of the revisionist is only about the amount for maintenance as fixed by the learned trial court. Admittedly the net salary of the husband is Rs. 89,000/- per month out of which Rs. 20,000/- has been fixed by the learned trial court from the date of application, and she is also highly qualified and have capacity to work something on the place of sitting in the house. The amount fixed by the learned trial court cannot be said to be less than sufficient for her maintenance, since, it is not too less than 25% of the total amount. In this way, there appears no any illegality in the order passed by the learned trial court in fixing the amount Rs. 20,000/- per month as maintenance. As a result, it does not warrant interference by this Court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad