Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:101464 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4049 of 2024 Revisionist :- Vinay Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Akansha Verma,Deepak Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Notice has been served personally to the opposite party no. 2 but none appeared on her behalf. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgment & order dated 04.05.2024 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Dehat in Case No. 265 of 2019 (Sarita Devi @ Lalita Devi Versus Vinay Singh Yadav) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby he has directed the revisionist to pay sum of Rs. 17,000/- per month as maintenance from the date of filing of the case and earlier amount given by the revisionist as well as maintenance amount given in other cases to the opposite party no. 2 by revisionist would be adjusted and furthermore prays that the maintenance would be paid to the opposite party no.2 each 10th date of every month and the arrear amount would be provided in monthly installments within 3 months, during the pendency of the present criminal revision. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no. 2 is wedded wife and marriage was performed in the year 2018 and due to family dispute wife started living in the Maika from the year 2019 and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance against the revisionist. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 17,000/- per month in favour of his wife/opposite party no. 2. He further submits that the revisionist works in Army and gets salary Rs. 58,385/- per month out of which he is to maintain his parents, brothers and sisters. He is the only earning person in his family. The amount fixed by the learned trial court Rs. 17,000/- per month in favour of his wife is more than sufficient and inappropriate to the income of the husband/ the revisionist. It is also submitted that as per observation made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Kulbhushan Kumar Vs. Raj Kumari (1970) 3 SCC 129 and Rajnesh Versus Neha and Another (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 324; Kalyan Dey Chowdhury vs. Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy AIR 2017 Supreme Court 2383 the maintenance amount can be fixed up to the extend of 25 % of net salary of the husband in favour of wife, but the learned trial court did not follow the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court but fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 17,000/- that cannot be said to be lawful, therefore, request to reduce the amount of maintenance and allow the revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the amount of maintenance as fixed by the learned trial court is sufficient and proportionate to the income of the husband. There is no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of material on record, the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party no. 2 is wedded wife of the revisionist and living separate from him in her Maika due to neglect on his part. He works in Army and gets Rs. 58,385/- as admitted by him during the course of his cross-examination. There are parents, brothers and sisters in his family and he is under moral obligation to support them also. As per observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kulbhushan Kumar Vs. Raj Kumari (1970) 3 SCC 129, the amount of maintenance to the wife may extent to 25% of net salary of the husband. The liabilities of the husband are also to be considered while fixing the amount of maintenance in favour of wife. Since the salary of the revisionist is Rs. 58,385/- out of which Rs. 17,000/- per month is more than 25%, therefore, this amount is liable to be reduced. In considered opinion of this Court, the amount of maintenance in favour of wife Rs. 17,000/- per month as maintenance seems to be excessive, therefore, it is liable to be reduced to the extent of Rs. 15,000/- per month from the date of application. Accordingly, this criminal revision is partly allowed and the amount of maintenance Rs. 17,000/- per month in favour of wife is reduced to Rs. 15,000/- per month from the date of application and the amount received or being received as interim maintenance or maintenance by the wife in the present case or in any other case shall be subject to adjustment in the present amount. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad