Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:125946 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 301 of 2025 Revisionist :- Km. Ridhi Minor And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ankur Tyagi,Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anil Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned counsel for the party No.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. This Crl. Revision has been filed by the revisionists with a prayer to allow the criminal revision and set aside the order dated 13.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffar Nagar in Misc Case No.1363/11 of 2023, under section 126(2) Cr.P.C( Manoj Kumar Vs. Km. Ridhi and others). It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionists that in this case an exparte order was passed under section 125 Cr.P.C on 19.8.2023 which was set aside by the learned trial court by order dated 13.11.2024 and case was restored to its original number. He further submits that during the course of pendency of an application under section 125 Cr.P.C the interim maintenance was fixed by the learned trial court but at the time of passing the order on 13.11.2024 no any amount for interim maintenance was fixed by the learned trial court. In this way the order passed as aforesaid is illegal, therefore, request to modify the order dated 13.11.2024 while granting the amount of maintenance in favour of wife and children. Learned counsel for opposite parties as well as learned A.G.A opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the order was passed exparte that was the reason it was set aside by the learned trial court vide order dated 13.11.2024 by imposing cost Rs.5000/- and the case under section 125 Cr.P.C was restored to its original number. Now the revisionists have an option to move an application for interim maintenance before the learned trial court which will be decided on merit after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties but there is no illegality in the order dated 13.11.2024. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for opposite party as well as learned A.G.A, perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that on account of absence of the opposite party, the order dated 19.8.2023 on the application under section 125 Cr.P.C was passed exparte fixing the amount of maintenance in favour of wife and minor children. At the instance of opposite party No.2/husband that order was set aside by the learned trial court by order dated 13.11.2024 for cost of Rs.5,000/- but no any amount for interim maintenance was fixed. In the considered opinion of this Court, the opposite party No.2 is husband and under legal obligation to maintain his wife and children, therefore, he is to pay the amount of maintenance Rs.10,000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs.5,000/- per month in favour of each child as interim maintenance during the pendency of application under section 125 Cr.P.C from the date of order. Accordingly, this revision is partly allowed. Order Date :- 29.7.2025 G.S Digitally signed by :- GHAN SHYAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad