Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137747 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2818 of 2025 Revisionist :- Deepak Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Sheetla Sahai 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 impugned judgment and order dated 15.04.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hathras in Criminal Maintenance Misc. Case No.260/2023 (Smt. Sonam vs. Deepak Kumar) u/s 125 Cr.P.C. and also prays to stay the effect and operation of the order dated 15.04.2025. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case opposite party no.2 is wife and is living separate from him without any sufficient reason and filed an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance which was allowed by the learned trial court by order dated 15.04.2025 fixing the amount maintenance of Rs.4500/- per month which is excessive and beyond his paying capacity. Further submitted that the revisionist operates a small barber shop and makes earning of Rs.1,80,000/- per year which is Rs.15,000/- per month. He has also filed income certificate issued from the office of Tehsildar, Uttrakhand showing his income to be Rs.1,80,000/- per year. He also submits that the revisionist is 90% handicapped, therefore, he is not able to do any job. He has some other liabilities to discharge even though the learned trial court has fixed the amount as aforesaid which is excessive, therefore, request to reduce the amount by setting aside the order dated 15.04.2025 passed illegally by the learned trial court. 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 the learned trial court, it appears that due to neglect on the part of the revisionist the wife is living separate from him from the year 2023 though marriage was performed in the year 2019 and from the wedlock there is a son namely, Jay who was snatched by the revisionist and other members of his family and she was compelled to live in her maika. The disability certificate which has been filed with this revision is not related to the present revisionist but it is related to some Somnath Thakur. The income certificate issued from the office of Tehsildar, Uttrakhand is on record showing his income Rs.1,80,000/- per year that is Rs.15,000/- per month. The revisionist being able bodied person is under legal obligation to maintain his wife who is living apart from him as a result of his neglect. The amount of maintenance Rs.4500/- in favour of wife as fixed by the learned trial court can also not be said to be excessive or more than sufficient or disproportionate to the income of the revisionist. So far as the amount of maintenance to be payable from the date of application is concerned, it is in accordance with the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and another (2021) 2 SCC 324, therefore, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage itself. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad