Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85424 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4483 of 2024 Revisionist :- Jaikaran Singh Rajput Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Abhishek Tiwari,Hari Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. 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 record. The present criminal revision has been moved with prayer to allow the revision and to quash the impugned judgment and order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi in Misc. Criminal Case No.584 of 2023 (Smt. Roshini Rajput vs. Jaikaran Sigh Rajput) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Chirgaon, District Jhansi. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no.2 is wedded wife of the revisionist who is living separate from him without any sufficient reason. The marriage between the opposite party and revisionist was performed in the year 2013 and she lived with him but used to abuse and harass him. She made pressure on him several times as a result he purchased land in her name and also he spent money on her education for nursing course i.e. A.N.M. in the year 2014 to 2016. After completing the diploma course she started making pressure on him to transfer the land and house in her name. Thereafter, she started living separate from him. During the course of proceedings she entered into compromise with the revisionist even though she refused to live with him and did not comply with the terms of the compromise. He further submits that she works in private nursing home Max Care Super Specialty Hospital, Shivaji Nagar, Jhansi as receptionist and gets Rs.10,000/- per month as salary and he also submits that she has developed illicit relations with someone regarding which a video was made viral. The revisionist has no source of income except the agricultural land measuring about 2 bighas and the opposite party no.2 is making income by working in nursing home as a receptionist even though the learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs.8000/- per month in favour of wife, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by the learned trial court and also to reduce the amount of maintenance. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. 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 18.07.2024 passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the opposite party no.2 was married to the revisionist in the year 2013 and from the year 2021 she is living apart from the him. She has alleged about the misbehaviour on the part of the revisionist against her and also expulsion from her matrimonial home regarding which she lodged an F.I.R. against him under Section 498A, 323 I.P.C. There was compromise entered into between the parties on the basis of which a Case No.982/2022 u/s 125 Cr.P.C. was disposed of finally. Later on, the revisionist did not bring the opposite party no.2 with him from her maika but started abusing and threatening that was the reason present application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. was filed in the year 2023 and again there was compromise between the husband and wife but it could not perpetuate. It shows that due to misbehaviour and neglect on the part of the revisionist opposite party no.2 is living separate from him and there is sufficient reason to live separately. So far as the income of the wife herself is concerned though she is said to have completed diploma course of A.N.M. but there is nothing on record to show that she is working in the aforesaid nursing home as receptionist and making income. On the other hand, the revisionist has admitted during his cross- examination before the learned trial court that now he owns about 2 bighas agricultural land and before initiation of this case he had ten and a half acres of land out of which except 2 bighas he has transferred the remaining land in favour of his mother through gift deed who is living in Mumbai, his father lives in the village and he is the only son of his parents since his other sisters are already married. It also shows that the revisionist has transferred the land just before the initiation of the proceedings in favour of his mother through gift deed to deprive the opposite party no.2 from maintenance. He had not disclosed his income in proper way, therefore, from the agricultural land owned by the revisionist the learned trial court has guessed the income of the revisionist to be Rs.40,000/- per month out of which Rs.8000/- per month has been fixed as the amount of maintenance in favour of wife which cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit warrants no interference by this Court. Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad