Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:129989 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3033 of 2025 Revisionist :- Ankul Kohli Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Avinash Pandey 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 record. The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 07.04.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Saharanpur in Case No. 845 of 2020 (Smt. Anjali and another Vs. Ankul Kohli) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the opposite party no. 2 is wife and opposite party no. 3 is minor son of the revisionist. The opposite party no. 2 is living apart from him without any sufficient reason and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance for herself and the minor son. The learned trial court has also allowed the application and fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 5000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs. 2000/- per month in favour of minor son from the date of application. Further submitted that though the revisionist was working in Mahindra Institute but after Covid-19 his job came to an end and now, he is unemployed. The amount of maintenance so fixed by the learned trial court is excessive and beyond his paying capacity. It is also submitted that an application under Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act was also filed by the revisionist for divorce which has been granted by the learned trial court and permanent alimony Rs. 5,00,000/- has been fixed against which she filed an appeal before this Court that is still pending. The learned trial court has fixed the said amount from the date of application that is illegal but it must have been from the date of order, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by the learned trial court and allow the revision and also to divide the amount of arrears of maintenance in equal installments for making payment easy. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned court for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. perusal of record and order passed by learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party no. 2 is wife and opposite party no. 3 is minor son of the revisionist. The opposite party no. 2 is living apart from him due to his neglect. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 5000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs. 2000/- per month in favour of minor son that cannot be said to be excessive or beyond his paying capacity or more than sufficient for maintenance of wife and minor son. The revisionist is able bodied person and working in Mahindra Institute, therefore, he cannot be said to be unable to make earning. The revisionist being husband is under legal obligation to maintain his wife and minor son. The amount of maintenance payable from the date of application, can also not be said to be illegal as observed in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha and another (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 324. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by learned trial court and it does not warrant interference by this Court. So far as the amount of arrears of maintenance from the date of application to the date of order is concerned, it may be divided into equal 15 monthly installments, those will be paid with current amount of maintenance month to month. Accordingly, the present revision is disposed of at the admission stage. The amount received by the wife as interim maintenance or maintenance in the present case or in any other case shall be subject to adjustment in the present amount. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad