Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111903 Court No. - 89 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3642 of 2024 Revisionist :- Sonu Saini Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Singh Hon'ble Harvir Singh,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit, filed by learned counsel for the revisionist today in Court, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record. 3. By the present revision, the revisionist has challenged the order dated 09.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad, whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court has awarded Rs. 8000/- per month to the wife- opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 2000/- per month to the minor son Abhinav Saini/opposite party no. 3 as interim maintenance. 4. As per the order dated 09.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad, wherein it has been stated that an application for grant of maintenance was moved by opposite party no. 2 against her husband i.e. revisionist, by taking into consideration the fact that service was effected on revisionist on 13.03.2024, in respect of the application filed by the opposite party no. 2, seeking maintenance from the revisionist. Thereafter the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad proceeded in the matter, holding that the revisionist did not respond, even after expiry of four weeks from the service of notice upon him. 5. Since the revisionist did not appear after the service upon him, but reportedly appeared on 09.05.2024 when the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad has endorsed on left side of the order-sheet "applicant present, OP is not responding on calls. Heard on interim and passed the order. 6. Learned counsel for the revisionist has stated that the revisionist has signed the order-sheet on the same date, but the said signatures are below endorsement made by either the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad or staff, so far as the service is concerned, no fault can be found against the order passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad. However, as far as grant of interim maintenance for a sum of Rs. 8,000/- is concerned, learned counsel for the revisionist states that ad-interim amount or interim maintenance fixed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad is excessive and the same has been fixed without hearing the revisionist. Learned counsel for the revisionist further states that as far as final order on maintenance is going to be passed, on the said application under section 125 Cr.P.C., is still pending for adjudication before the trial court. 7. Under the circumstances, and as per the facts available on record, the order of interim maintenance, wherein a sum of Rs. 8,000/- has been fixed, no illegality can be found in the impugned order dated 09.05.2024. Since the final order is yet to be passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad by taking into consideration income of both the parties i.e. revisionist and the opposite party no. 2. The same shall remain open to either of the parties to adduce the respective evidence, such as the income from different sources. It has also come on record, that the wife-opposite party no. 2 is suffering from kidney ailment and she needs immediate care and medical attention. 8. Learned A.G.A. for the State has submitted that a patient, who is suffering from kidney ailment, requires timely medical care and in absence of any interim maintenance, she shall be deprived of her survival, therefore, the amount of interim maintenance fixed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad is reasonable and adequate as per the need of opposite party no. 2. 9. Without going into other controversies on merits of the case, it shall remain be open to the revisionist to contest the matter by bringing adequate evidence on record before the trial court, no other issue is left to be decided in the present revision of the revisionist. 10. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant revision is finally disposed of accordingly. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad