Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112541 Court No. - 89 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3274 of 2024 Revisionist :- Smt. Hem Lata Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ashutosh Tripathi,Gaurav Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Dubey Hon'ble Harvir Singh,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Neither learned counsel for the revisionist nor learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is present. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present. 3. Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. The present criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 6.5.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hathras, whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court directed the opposite party herein to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- per month as interim maintenance to the revisionist- wife namely, Smt. Hem Lata Singh from the date of filing of application by the 7th day of every Calendar month. 5. From the perusal of the order dated 06.05.2024, it reflects that opposite party no. 2/husband, who is working as Depot Manager with the Food Corporation of India (FCI), is drawing a net salary of Rs. 1,25,000/- per month, whereas the revisionist/wife, who is working as Assistant Teacher and drawing a net salary of Rs. 49,000/- per month. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has submitted that in this case, husband and wife both are salaried employees, although as per averments of revisionist, her husband is drawing more salary in her comparison. The revisionist, who had to undergo a miscarriage, purportedly by administration of wrong medicine, brought by her husband without prescription. She has a reasonable cause to live separately from her husband. He further submits that even if the wife is doing job or if she is also an earning member, then also, the husband is fully responsible and duty bound to take car of wife and children, who ought to have been depending on the husband. 7. Learned A.G.A. has also placed reliance upon paragraph 6 of the order dated 06.05.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghaziabad, which reads as under:- "In this case, husband and wife both are working, having salaried income. Although as per averments of revisionist, her husband is drawing more salary in her comparison. The applicant, who had to undergo a miscarriage, purportedly by administration of wrong medicine, brought by her husband without prescription. She has a reasonable cause to live separately from her husband, on the premise of above-said at the hands of Opponent. She has herself disclosed that she is an Assistant Teacher, drawing Net-Salary of Rs. 49,000/- per month after all deduction. In this case, upon careful perusal of the records, husband shall be treated as a person, having more than sufficient means in comparison to his wife. Applicant is, in state of neglect and she is not being properly maintained by the opponent/husband." 8. Learned Judge, Family Court has relied upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and another (2021) 2 SCC 324 and Criminal Appeal No. 3446 of 2023 (Aditi @ Mithi vs. Jitesh Sharma), judgement dated 6.11.2023. 9. After going through the judgement passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hathras and after carefully taking into consideration the facts available on record, this Court has come to the conclusion that the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court is perfectly valid and in accordance with law, hence no interference is called for in the present case, as the order has been passed on equitable ground and the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh (supra) and Aditi @ Mithi (supra). 10. The instant revision is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Faridul Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad