HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4546 of 2025 Court No. - 84 HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. This criminal revision has been filed with prayer to allow the revision ans set aside the order dated 05.07.2025 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Moradabad in Case No.31 of 2022 (Smt. Pooja @ Divyanshi v. Deepak Sagar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Moradabad. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no.2 is husband who entered into marriage with her on 15.02.2021 and marriage was registered on 17.03.2021. Thereafter, dispute arose between the parties in relation to illicit relationship of opposite party no.2 with some other lady. When objected she was beaten by the opposite party no.2 that was the reason she started living separate from him. The opposite party no.2 works as TG-2 in Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and gets Rs.56,670/- per month as gross salary. Learned trial court fixed the amount of Rs.10,000/- per month in favour of wife/revisionist that is disproportionate to the income of the husband, therefore, request to increase the amount. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the gross salary of the opposite party no.2 is Rs.56,670/- per month but there are some deductions. After deductions he gets Rs.40,436/- per month and he is under legal obligation to maintain his other family members and also has E.M.I. Rs.13,217/- per month for loan that is being deducted from Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Atharva Dixit, Shriyanshi Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Pooja @ Divyanshi .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) his salary. In this way, the learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance after considering all these facts and it is proportionate to the income of the husband. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record and the order dated 05.07.2025, it appears that the revisionist being wife of opposite party no.2 is living apart from him due to neglect on his part. The opposite party no.2 works as TG-2 in Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and gets Rs.56,670/- per month as per pay slip for the month of June, 2025. After deductions he gets Rs.40,436/- per month out of which Rs.13,217/- per month are being paid by him as E.M.I. for loan. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs.10,000/- per month in favour of wife. As per the observations 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 extend to 25% of the net salary of the husband but the liabilities of the husband can also not be ignored. In this way, keeping in view the net salary of the opposite party no.2/husband and deduction of amount of E.M.I. for loan, the amount of maintenance Rs.10,000/- per month in favour of wife cannot be said to be less or disproportionate to the net salary of the opposite party no.2/husband. Therefore, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed. September 10, 2025 Ashok Gupta CRLR No. 4546 of 2025 2 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad