Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137679 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2816 of 2025 Revisionist :- Nasbulain Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ajai Kumar,Chandrabhan 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 allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 25.04.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Chandauli in Maintenance Case No.194 of 2022 (Nazoo Praveen & others vs. Nasbulain Ahmad) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Balua, District Chandauli and also prays to stay effect and operation of the order dated 25.04.2025. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no.2 is wife of the revisionist and opposite party nos.3 & 4 are minor children. Further submits that opposite party no.2 started living separate from him without any sufficient cause and moved an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. which was allowed by the learned trial court by order dated 25.04.2025 fixing the amount of maintenance Rs.3000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs.1500/- per month for each child and the the amount so fixed by the learned trial court is excessive and beyond paying capacity of the revisionist. Further submits that the revisionist works as tailor and has not too much income to maintain himself and also to provide the amount of maintenance as fixed by the learned trial court, therefore, request to reduce the amount so fixed by the learned trial court. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case admittedly the opposite party no.2 is wedded wife of the revisionist and opposite party nos.3 & 4 are minor children. He also contends that wife is living separate from him due to his neglect and misbehaviour. He also contends that the revisionist has already married with another lady and is living with her as husband-wife. The amount so fixed by the learned trial court cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. There is no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. 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 admittedly opposite party no.2 is wife and opposite party nos.3 & 4 are minor children of the revisionist. The opposite party no.2 is living separate from him in her maika with the minor children due to neglect on the part of the revisionist. The revisionist had entered into second marriage and living with her without getting any decree of divorce from the first wife. He works as tailor and makes income though he has not disclosed his accurate income before the learned trial court. He being able bodied person is under legal obligation to maintain his wife and minor children. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs.3000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs.1500/- per month for each child from the date of application which cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. So far as fixing the amount of maintenance from the date of application is concerned, it is in accordance with the observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and another (2021) 2 SCC 324. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court, therefore, warrants no interference by this court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad