Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64885 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2924 of 2024 Revisionist :- Vivek Rastogi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Amir Khan 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 this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hapur in Criminal Case No.184/2022 (Km. Peehu Rastogi vs. Vivek Rastogi) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Garhmukteshwar, District Hapur where by the revisionist has been directed to make payment of Rs.1000/- per month from the date of application i.e. 12.05.2022 till the date of order i.e. 04.04.2024 and Rs.3000/- from the date of order i.e. 04.04.2024 to the opposite party no.2 towards maintenance. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the revisionist is father of opposite party no.2 who is minor. Further submitted that there was dispute between the revisionist and his wife Smt. Naina Rastogi as a result a petition u/s 13B Hindu Marriage Act was filed and decree of divorce was passed by order dated 13.02.2016 on the basis of compromise between the parties in which the wife (mother of the opposite party no.2) agreed to receive Rs.5 lakhs for her own maintenance including the maintenance of the minor child and also other expenses. Again an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance of Km. Peehu Rastogi was filed on her behalf which was granted by the learned trial court by order dated 04.04.2024 fixing the amount of maintenance of Rs.1000/- per month from the date of application to the date of order and then Rs.3000/- per month from the date of order. He also submits that the amount on behalf of the opposite party no.2 was received by her mother and she agreed not to file any claim for maintenance on the part of minor child, then the minor child cannot be entitled for maintenance u/s 125 Cr.P.C. Even though the learned trial court has passed the order in her favour as aforesaid which cannot be said to be lawful, therefore, request to set it aside and allow the revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case opposite party no.2 is minor daughter of the revisionist and she is entitled for maintenance from her father. The mother cannot enter into agreement with the revisionist/father of the minor in relation to the waiver of rights of the minor. She can agree only for her own interest or waive of her own right for maintenance or permanent alimony but she has no right to waive the rights of the minor. If any agreement is entered into by the wife/mother of the minor with her father that cannot be said to have binding effect on the minor, therefore, the order passed by learned trial court cannot be said to be illegal. 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 dated 04.04.2024 passed by the learned trial court, it appears that in a petition for divorce between the revisionist and his wife an agreement was entered into between both of them regarding maintenance of the wife and the minor daughter for taking Rs.5 lakhs on the basis of which divorce decree was passed u/s 13B Hindu Marriage Act by order dated 13.02.2016. Later on, present application us 125 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the minor daughter of the revisionist which was allowed by order dated 04.04.2024 fixing the amount of maintenance i.e. Rs.1000/- per month from the date of application to the date of order and from the date of order Rs.3000/- per month. It is settled principle of law that the rights of minor cannot be waived by any person during the period of his/her minority. The mother had no right to waive the right of maintenance of the minor while entering into an agreement with her husband for getting divorce on the basis of compromise between the parties in a petition u/s 13B of Hindu Marriage Act. If any agreement is entered that may have no binding effect on the interest of the minor and it can also not deprive the right of maintenance of the minor child. The learned trial court has also considered all these facts and the law as laid down in the case of Ganesh vs. Sudhir Kumar Srivastava 2020(20) SCC 787 in which it has been held that the mother has no right to waive the right of maintenance vested in the minor child. In this way, the order passed by learned trial court dated 04.04.2025 cannot be said to be erroneous and there is no any illegality or impropriety in the aforesaid order but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. So far as the payment of arrears of maintenance from the date of application to the date of order is concerned, it may be paid in 12 equal installments and this amount shall be paid per month with the current monthly amount of maintenance. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admissions stage itself. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad