HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4073 of 2024 Court No. - 91 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Siddharth Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 08.05.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gorakhpur passed in Criminal Case No. 205 of 2019 (Ujma Tabassum vs. Firoz Ahmad) under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., P.S. Gorakhpur, District Gorakhpur whereby the revisionist is directed to pay Rs. 3500/- per month to opposite party no.2. 3. The sole argument of learned counsel for the revisionist is that he is not challenging the merits/ correctness or otherwise of the impugned judgment and also the amount of maintenance awarded by the trial court under the said judgment, he only confines his prayer regarding the payment of amount of arrears which is accumulated approximately to the tune of Rs. 2,10,000/- as the same is too excessive and cannot be given in one stroke and he requested to divide the same into easy equal installments. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA has not opposed the prayer made by the counsel for the revisionist. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, it is admitted fact that opposite party no.2/ wife is legally wedded wife of the revisionist. However it is pious duty of the revisionist to maintain his wife, but there should be a balance between the income and responsibility of the husband. There is no Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Deeksha Gupta, Siddharth Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sudhir Kumar Tripathi Firoz Ahmad .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) dispute regarding the income of the revisionist as he is doing work for installing of flour mill machines and he has no regular source of income. Hence there is no need to make any observation on this issue. There is also no documentary evidence regarding the income of opposite party no.2/ wife on record, who filed the application U/s 125 Cr.P.C. and the trial court while allowing the application awarded the maintenance allowance vide impugned judgment and order dated 08.05.2024. There appears no illegality or impropriety being committed in the order passed by the learned trial court, therefore, it does not warrant any interference by this Court. However considering the fact that the revisionist is a farmer, he is unable to pay total arrears of maintenance allowance from the date of filing of application till date on one stroke. 6. Since the revisionist has not challenge the merits and amount of maintenance. In such circumstances, it is directed that the revisionist shall pay the total arrears amount as awarded by the trial court in favour of opposite party no.2 in 20 equal installments on the 7th day of each calendar month. The first installment shall commence from 7th October 2025. It is further directed that the revisionist shall pay Rs. 3500/- per month to opposite party no.2 regularly from the next month i.e. October 2025 as awarded by the trial court under the impugned judgment. 7. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of. September 10, 2025 C. MANI CRLR No. 4073 of 2024 2 (Madan Pal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad