Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:132775 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2660 of 2025 Revisionist :- Smt Keerti Rastogi Opposite Party :- Manish Rastogi And 5 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ekansh Varma Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record. This criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 21.02.2025 passed by learned Additional Session Judge (F.T.C.), District Jhansi in Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2021 (Smt Dr. Keerti Rastogi and others Vs. Manish Rastogi Vs. Keerti Rastogi) and Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 2021 (Manish Rastogi Vs. Keerti Rastogi) under Section 29 of Domestic Violence Act arising out of the same order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C./Crime against Women in Case No. 1079 of 2017 (Smt Dr. Keerti Rastogi Vs. Manish Rastogi and others). It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case an application under Sections 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act was filed which was allowed by the learned trial court by order dated 10.08.2021 and Rs. 1,500/- per month for alternative accommodation under Section 19 Rs. 10,000/- per month for maintenance under Section 20 and Rs. 2,00,000/- lumpsum under Section 22 of the Act were fixed. Against the order dated 10.08.2021 the revisionist filed an Appeal No. 49 of 2021 and the opposite party no.1 also filed a Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 2021. Learned Appellate court partly allowed the appeal filed by the wife and also partly allowed the appeal filed by the husband/opposite party no. 1 vide order dated 21.02.2025 by which lumpsum amount under Section 22 of the Act, Rs. 2,00,000/- was reduced to Rs. 1,00,000/-. It is also submitted that the opposite party no. 1 has not paid any amount as decided by the learned trial court. In this way, the learned Appellate court has committed error in passing the order as aforesaid, therefore, request to set it aside and allow the revision. It is also submitted that the revisionist is said to be a practising doctor but she has not sufficient income making her able to maintain herself, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by the learned Appellate court dated 21.02.2025 and allow the revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. On considering the facts and circumstances, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the orders passed by the learned trial court dated 10.08.2021 and the learned Appellate court dated 21.02.2025, it appears that the learned Appellate court has reduced the lumpsum amount from Rs. 2,00,000/- to Rs. 1,00,000/- under Section 22 of the Act while recording the reasons that complainant herself practises as doctor by which she makes sufficient income and being doctor she is self dependent, therefore, the lumpsum amount is reduced to Rs. 2,00,000/- to Rs. 1,00,000/-. In considered opinion of this Court there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned Appellate Court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. So far as the realization of amount as fixed by the learned court is concerned he has an option to move an application before the learned court in this regard and the learned court will make its endeavor to get the amount realized from the opposite party no. 1 in accordance with law. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad