Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119061 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2222 of 2025 Revisionist :- Rahul Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Padmaker Pandey,Pankaj Srivastava 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 material on record. This criminal revision has been filed with prayer to set aside the order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Room No.1, Kanpur Nagar upon the application of the respondent under Section 125 Cr.P.C. registered as Misc. Case No.1322 of 2022 (Smt. Anshika Dwivedi vs. Rahul Dwivedi) allowing the application of the respondent and directing the revisionist to pay Rs.8000/- per month to the respondent no.2 as maintenance from the date of application i.e. 15.07.2022 which is payable to respondent no.2 on or before the tenth day of each month. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case opposite party no.2 is his wife whose marriage was performed in the year 2019. She started misbehaving with the revisionist and other members of his family including his old parents and when objected by the revisionist she left his house in the year 2022 and started living separately from him. Further submitted that she works as a beautician and makes sufficient earning to maintain herself even though she filed an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. which has been decided by the learned trial court fixing the amount of Rs.8000/- per month as maintenance from the date of application. He also submitted that revisionist was working in Indian Army and due to scissor disability he was given retirement and gets Rs.23,000/- per month as pension. The learned trial court has directed the revisionist to pay the amount of maintenance from the date of application on the place of date of order. He also submits that the amount of arrears be divided into installments for easy payment. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case due to neglect by the revisionist opposite party no.2/wife is living apart from him and she is unable to maintain herself though she is said to operate beauty parlour but there is no any material that she is making sufficient earning to maintain herself. On the other hand, the revisionist is getting Rs.23,000/- per month as pension out of which Rs.8000/- per month in favour of wife cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. 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 the learned trial court, it appears that opposite party no.2/wife is living separate from the revisionist due to his neglect and is unable to maintain herself. There is nothing on record to show that she is making sufficient income to maintain herself by operating beauty parlour. On the other hand the revisionist is getting Rs.23,000/- per month as pension out of which he has been directed to pay Rs.8000/- per month in favour of opposite party no.2/wife. There appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court, therefore, it does not warrant any interference by this Court. So far as the amount of maintenance from the date of application to the date of order is concerned, it shall be divided into 12 equal installments to be payable with the current amount of maintenance regularly. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad