Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:105533 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 345 of 2025 Revisionist :- Umesh Chand Pandey And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Rakesh Kumar,Sanjay Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record. This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionists with prayer to set aside the ex-parte judgment and order dated 08.11.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Officer Gram Nyayalaya, Tehshil Campierganj, Gorakhpur in Complaint Case No. 2624 of 2015 (Smt. Pushpa Pandey Vs. Umesh Chandra Pandey & others) under Section 12 Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, Police Station Campierganj, District Gorakhpur whereby the learned court directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 2000/- per month as interim maintenance to the opposite party no. 2 and amounting Rs. 50,000/- in one as damages for the physical and mental cruelty and order dated 05.12.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. Court no. 2, Gorakhpur in Criminal Appeal No. 127 of 2022 where by criminal appeal filed by the revisionist has been dismissed. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists that in this case, opposite party no. 2 is his divorce wife. A decree of divorce was passed by the competent court on 08.11.2016 and after the decree of divorce, he entered into second marriage and have children. An application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. was filed by the opposite party no. 2 in which Rs. 2000/- were fixed as maintenance which are being paid regularly to the wife. Again she filed an application under Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act which was decided by ex-parte order dated 08.11.2019 fixing the amount of Rs. 2000/- as maintenance subject to adjustment in any other amount being received by her as maintenance in other case and also Rs. 50,000/- were to be paid in lump sum. Residential accommodation was also to be provided to her in a joint family or in alternative. He filed an appeal against the aforesaid order dated 08.11.2019 which was decided by the learned appellate court on 05.12.2024 and appeal was dismissed. Further submitted that the revisionist works as Sikshamitra and gets salary Rs. 10,000/- per month out of which he is to make payment of Rs. 2500/- as maintenance in case under section 125 CrPC and also he is to maintain his second wife and children. He has no source to make payment of lump-sum amount of Rs. 50,000/- as directed by the learned trial court in the present case. The learned trial court did not consider all these facts while passing the order dated 8.11.2019 but dismissed the appeal which cannot be said to be lawful, therefore, request to set aside the orders passed by the learned trial court and also by the appellate court and allow the revision. 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. perusal of record and order passed by learned trial court and appellate court, it appears that the opposite party no. 2 is wedded wife of the revisionist no.1 Umesh Chandra Pandey. A decree of divorce has been passed between both of them on 08.11.2016 which has been challenged before this Court by the wife and is still pending in appeal. In an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. the revisionist was directed to make payment of amount of Rs. 2500/- per month which is being paid by him as stated. In the present case, the learned trial court fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 2000/- per month subject to adjustment in the amount being received by the wife as maintenance in any other case. In this way, the amount of Rs. 2000/- as fixed by the learned trial court in the present case shall be adjusted in the amount of maintenance that is Rs. 2500/- in the case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. therefore, after adjustment he will make payment of Rs. 2500/- only to the wife being the larger amount. The amount of Rs. 50,000/- which has been granted by the learned trial court in favour of wife for physical and mental torture is payable once and this amount cannot be said to be excessive. In this way, the order passed by the learned trial court cannot be said to be illegal or inappropriate. The learned appellate court has also considered all these facts while deciding the appeal. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the orders passed by learned trial court as well as the appellate court but this criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed at the admission stage. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad