Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87484 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 273 of 2025 Revisionist :- Smt Dharamvati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari,Vijay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with a prayer to set aside the order dated 17.10.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Rampur in Case No.108 of 2023 (Smt. Dharamvati Vs. Roop Singh), under section 125 Cr.P.C. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party No.2 is husband who was married to the revisionist in the year 2019. The opposite party No.2 started misbehaving with the revisionist and also made demand of dowry that was the reason she started living in her Maika. She moved an application under section 125 Cr.P.C for maintenance which was decided by the learned trial court vide order dated 17.10.2024 fixing the amount Rs.3000/- per month from the date of application. He also submits that the amount as fixed by the learned trial court is meager and is not sufficient for the maintenance of wife. He also submits that the opposite party No.2 works in Rudrapur factory and earns Rs.20,000/- per month and he makes some income from agricultural land also. In this way the learned trial court has fixed the amount disproportionate to the income of the opposite party No.2, therefore, request to increase the amount. Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer as aforesaid. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A for the State, perusal of record and the order passed by the learned trial court, indisputably the revisionist is wife of opposite party No.2 who was married with him in the year 2019. She is living apart from her husband due to his neglect. So far as the income of the revisionist is concerned he said to be working in Rudrapur factory but there is nothing on record to show that he gets Rs.20,000/- per month as salary. The learned trial court has decided the income of the opposite party No.2 as Rs.10,000/- per month on the basis of guesswork out of which Rs.3000/- has been fixed as maintenance in favour of wife which cannot be said to be less and disproportionate to the income of the husband. In this way there appear no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this revision is dismissed. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 G.S Digitally signed by :- GHAN SHYAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad