Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80638 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4224 of 2024 Revisionist :- Mohd Zahid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Suresh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. As per office report, notice has been personally served on opposite party no. 2, but none appeared on behalf of her. 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 a prayer to allow the present revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 23.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Court No. 2, Aligarh in Case No. 1917 of 2022, Old Case No. 674 / 11 / 2018, (Smt. Shama Parveen Vs. Mohd. Jahid). It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no. 2 is wife of revisionist, who is living apart from the revisionist without any sufficient cause. The allegations made by her regarding demand of dowry and harassment are totally false. He never subjected her to harassment. He plies a rickshaw and pay rent Rs. 400/- per day and saves Rs. 300/-, which comes to Rs. 9,000/- per month. There is no any other source of income. He is to maintain his old parents but learned Trial Court has not considered all these facts and fixed the amount of Rs. 6,000/- per month as maintenance from the date of application, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by learned Trial Court and reduce the amount. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. On considering the facts and circumstances, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party no. 2 is wife of the revisionist and lives with her mother. As per allegations, she was subjected to harassment by the revisionist regarding which she made complaint at the Police Station in which there was compromise but again she was misbehaved that was the reason she started living in her Maika. She has no means of earning to maintain her. On the other hand, admittedly the revisionist plies a rickshaw and makes income though, he pays rent Rs. 400/- per day and saves Rs. 300/-, as per his own statement made before the learned Trial Court during the course of his examination. In this way, his monthly income comes to Rs. 9,000/- - 10,000/- per month. He is also to support his old parents and these liabilities can also not be ignored while fixing the amount of maintenance in favour of wife. The amount of Rs. 6,000/- per month out of aforesaid income of the revisionist seems to be excessive, therefore, liable to be reduced. Accordingly, the amount of maintenance Rs. 6,000/- per month is reduced to Rs. 5,000/- per month from the date of application. In view of the above, this criminal revision is partly allowed. However, the amount of arrears of maintenance payable by the revisionist from the date of application to the date of order shall be divided into twelve equal installments with the current amount of maintenance. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 SK Srivastava Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad