Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119457 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2449 of 2024 Revisionist :- Smt. Pushpa And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Arvind Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anadi Krishna Narayana,G.A.,Neeharika Sinha Narayana Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. This criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and summon the lower court record and to enhance the award dated 15.03.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kannauj in Case No. 134/12 of 2022 (Smt. Pushpa and others Vs. Saroj Kumar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., P.S. Chhibramau, District Kannauj as prayed in maintenance application from the date of application i.e. 04.03.2022. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no. 2 is husband of the revisionist no. 1 and father of revisionist nos. 2 and 3 those are minor daughters. He further submits that the revisionist is living separate from the opposite party no. 2 due to neglect and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the learned trial court which was decided by order dated 15.03.2024 fixing the amount of maintenance in favour of wife Rs. 5,000/- per month and Rs. 2,000/- per month for each child, total Rs. 9,000/- per month. He also submits that the opposite party no. 2 is an employee in Army and gets regular salary. He admitted during his cross-examination that he gets gross salary Rs. 55,000/- to Rs. 60,000/-. The learned trial court has decided the net salary of the opposite party no. 2 Rs. 42,827/- per month after deduction for the month of March 2020. He also submits that as per observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kulbhushan Kumar Vs. Raj Kumari (1970) 3 SCC 129, that the amount of maintenance to the wife may extend to 25% of net salary of the husband. He also submits that two minor daughters are in school going age and Rs. 2,000/- per month for each child are being paid as school fee regarding which he has filed school receipts. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of Rs. 2,000/- per month for each child that is less than sufficient in view of their education expenses and maintenance, therefore, request to increase the amount of maintenance in favour of wife and two minor children. Learned counsel for the opposite party opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the wife is living separate from him without any sufficient reason and he is ready to keep her with him but she is reluctant. He also submits that there are some other liabilities on the opposite party no. 2 and the amount fixed by the learned trial court is sufficient for the maintenance of wife and the minor children. There is no any illegality in the order passed by the learned trial court. 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 material on record, the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the revisionist is seeking increase in the amount of maintenance as fixed by the learned trial court in favour of wife and two minor children. As per record in the month of March 2020, the salary slip disclosed net salary Rs. 42,827/- after deduction though the opposite party no. 2 has admitted during his cross-examination before the learned trial court that he gets gross salary Rs. 55,000/- to Rs. 60,000/- per month. On the other hand, the revisionist no. 1, the wife is not able to maintain herself since she has no any income. There is nothing on record to show that she is making income or she has means to maintain herself. As per observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kulbhushan Kumar Vs. Raj Kumari (1970) 3 SCC 129, that the amount of maintenance to the wife may extend to 25% of net salary of the husband and the education expenses of both the child are Rs. 2,000/- each as per receipts on record. In this way, the amount fixed in favour of wife and two minor children is less than sufficient and disproportionate to the net salary of the husband, therefore, it is liable to be increased. Accordingly, this criminal revision is partly allowed and the amount of maintenance in favour of wife is increased to Rs. 10,000/- per month on the place of Rs. 5,000/- per month and in favour of minor children Rs. 5,000/- per month for each child on the place of Rs. 2,000/- per month, total Rs. 20,000/- per month and this amount is payable from the date of application. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad