Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106981 Court No. - 89 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 95 of 2017 Revisionist :- Awanish Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Chandra(Senior Adv.),Pratik Chandra,Shailendra Kumar Tiwari Hon'ble Sandeep Jain,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Neither revisionist nor opposite party no.2 is present. However, learned A.G.A. for the State/opposite party no.1 is present. 3. This criminal revision has been preferred by the husband- revisionist against judgment and order dated 29.11.2016 passed by the Principal Judge Family Court, Mirzapur in Case No.92/2010 (Smt. Anjana Singh vs. Awanish Kumar Singh), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Chunar, District Mirzapur, whereby, the interim maintenance of Rs.1500/- per month has been enhanced finally to Rs.5,000/- per month to be awarded by the husband to the wife-respondent no.2. 4. Wife/respondent no.2 has filed counter affidavit stating that her husband/revisionist is employed in NTPC who was drawing the salary of Rs.53,675/- per month in the year 2012 which has been subsequently, enhanced from time to time and at present he is drawing a substantially more salary. 5. The husband-revisionist challenged the impugned order on the ground that the amount of maintenance awarded to his wife was excessive and that she was not entitled to any maintenance because she was living in adultery. 6. From the perusal of the impugned judgment, it is evident that the husband-revisionist presented no evidence to support his claim of adultery. Further, the husband-revisionist admitted that he was appointed as an operator in NTPC in October, 1986, with a basic pay of Rs. 26,000/- per month. He also admitted that RTI Act inquiry confirmed his gross salary for January, 2012 was Rs. 53,675/- per month. The Court definitely found that the wife was living separately from her husband for valid reasons. Therefore, the finding of the trial court cannot be deemed perverse. 7. Judicial cognizance of this fact can be taken that nine years have elapsed since impugned order and during this period keeping in view the prevailing inflation, the salary of the husband/revisionist will be in excess of Rs.1 Lakh per month as of today. The trial court has only awarded a maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month. Lower court has also considered the above facts and has rightly awarded maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent/wife. 8. In view of the above, no material illegality has been committed by the lower court in awarding the impugned maintenance to respondent/wife, as such, this criminal revision has no merits. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed. 9. Office is directed to transmit copy of this order to the trial court. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 S.A. Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad