HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4889 of 2025 Court No. - 84 HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AG.A. for the State. 2. Present criminal revision has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 31.07.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hathras, in Case No. 61 of 2023 (Smt. Neha Versus Amit Kumar), under Section 125 Cr. P.C., Police Station Sadabad, District Hathras, whereby learned judge has ordered for the maintenance at the rate of Rs.11,000/- per month to the opposite party no.2 from the date of filing of the case. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the opposite party no.2 is wife, who is living separately from the husband/revisionist. An application has been filed by the opposite party no.2/wife under Section 125 Cr. P.C., and learned trial court has fixed Rs.11,000/- per month as interim maintenance in her favour, whereas revisionist is working as a constable in P.A.C. and get salary Rs. 41,220/- per month. He also submitted that there are liability of mother, sister and other members of his family and Rs.11,000/- per month out of Rs.41220/- as interim maintenance in favour of wife, are excessive and disproportionate. As the revisionist is ready to keep her with him as wife, but she is living separately from him without any sufficient reason, as such she is not entitled for interim maintenance, therefore, request to set aside the order dated 31.07.2025 and reduce the amount of interim Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Narendra Pal Singh, Rajat Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Amit Kumar .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) maintenance as fixed by the learned trial court. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. 5.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 the order dated 31.07.2025 passed by learned trial court, it appears that revisionist and opposite party no.2 were wedded to each other in the year 2020 and due to neglect on the part of the revisionist, she started living in her maika. She has made several allegations against the members of the family of the revisionist and also said to be misbehaved. The opposite party no.2 is graduate, B.T.C. and TET qualified woman, but there is nothing on record to show that she makes any income in either way and on the other hand, the basic salary of the revisionist was Rs. 21,700/- per month in the year 2018 and in the intervening year, as a result of increment, the salary might have increased. The revisionist himself has stated about his salary Rs. 41,220 per month. Apex Court in the case of Kulbhushan Kumar v. Raj Kumari and Anr, (1970) 3 SCC 129, held that 25% of the husband's net salary would be just and proper to be awarded as maintenance to the opposite party-wife, therefore, amount of Rs. 11,000/- in favour of wife cannot be said to disproportionate or more than sufficient. There is no illegality in the order passed by the learned trial court, therefore, it does not require any interference by this Court. So far as amount of arrears is concerned, it shall be paid in 12 equal installments payable month to month with current amount. 6. Accordingly, the present criminal revision is disposed of finally at the admission stage itself. September 15, 2025 T.S. CRLR No. 4889 of 2025 2 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad