Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113014 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3339 of 2024 Revisionist :- Avneesh @ Anshu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Harsh Vardhan Shastri,Ram Ashish Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Monika Pal Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. The Crl. revision has been filed by the revisionist with a prayer to allow the criminal revision and set aside the order dated 14.06.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge , Family Court, Etawah in Case No.421 of 2020 (Soni Kumari and another Vs.Avneesh alias Anshu), under section 125 Cr.P.C, Police Station Jaswantnagar, District Etawah. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that in this case the opposite party Nos 2 and 3 are wife and minor daughter of the revisionist. He further submits that opposite party No.2 is living separate with her minor daughter from him without any sufficient reason. He further submits that he is ready to keep her with him but she is not willing to come with him. He also submits that he works as labourer and have no any regular income, therefore, he is not in capacity to make payment of amount of maintenance as fixed by the learned trial court that is Rs.6,000/- per month in favour of wife and Rs.2000/- per month in favour of minor daughter, total Rs.8000/- per month. The learned trial court did not consider this fact but fixed the amount as aforesaid, therefore, request to allow this revision and reduce the amount. Learned counsel for opposite party No.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the revisionist is an able bodied person and operates confectionery shop and make handsome income. The amount of maintenance in favour of wife Rs.6,000/- per month and Rs. 2000/- per month in favour of minor daughter cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. She also contends that the opposite party No.2 is an unemployed lady and has no any source of income to maintain herself and her minor daughter but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court dated 14.6.2024, it appears that the opposite party No.2 is wife and opposite party No.3 is minor daughter of the revisionist. The opposite party No.2 is living separate from him due to his neglect. She has a minor daughter and has no any source of income either to maintain herself or her minor daughter. The revisionist is husband of opposite party No.2. An able bodied person is under legal obligation to maintain his wife and minor child. In case it is assumed that he is labourer even then Rs.400/ per day may be his income that will be Rs.12,000/- per month out of which Rs.8000/ per month as maintenance to his wife and minor daughter seems to be excessive and beyond paying capacity of revisionist. Thus, the amount of maintenance in favour of wife Rs.6000/- per month is reduced to Rs.5000/- per month and Rs.2000/- per month in favour of minor daughter shall remain the same from the date of application. Accordingly, this criminal revision is partly allowed and the amount of maintenance is modified accordingly. Any amount received as maintenance either in this case or in any other case by the opposite party No.2/wife shall be subject to adjustment in the present amount of maintenance. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 G.S Digitally signed by :- GHAN SHYAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad