Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67303 Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4514 of 2024 Revisionist :- Manish Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Anuj Laloriya,Gaurav Tiwari,Sanjay Chaturvedi,Santosh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ankur Vishwakarma,G.A.,Kapoor Chandra Vishwakarma Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 alongwith learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 07.08.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonbhadra in Case No.136 of 2019 (Archana Chaubey vs. Manish Sharma) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case revisionist is husband of the opposite party no.2 who is living separate from him without any reasonable excuse from the year 2019. He further submitted that the opposite party no.2 has filed false documents relating to the income of the revisionist regarding which he moved an application u/s 340 Cr.P.C. which was kept pending and an application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. was finally decided by the order dated 07.08.2024 and amount for maintenance was fixed for Rs.10,000/- per month from the date of application. Further submitted that the learned trial court was required to decide the application u/s 340 Cr.P.C. first and then to decide the application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. He also submits that in the year 2019 his gross salary was Rs.32,091/- per month and after deduction it was Rs.28,950/- per month but in the year 2024 after four years it has been assumed to be Rs.40,000/- per month, since the revisionist is Technical Assisant in Agriculture Department. The parents of the revisionist are dependent on him and they are suffering from old age ailments. The revisionist bears the expenses on treatment of his parents but these expenses were not taken into consideration by the learned trial court while fixing the amount of maintenance, therefore, request to set aside the order dated 07.08.2024 passed by the learned trial court and reduce the amount. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the salary slip for the month of February, 2019 was filed by the revisionist showing gross salary Rs.32,091/- per month and net salary Rs.28,950/- per month but he did not file the current salary slip for the year 2023. It is further contended that parents of the revisionist are not dependent on him but they have sufficient means for their support. It is also contended that the revisionist has not filed any proof regarding expenses incurred by him on the treatment of his parents but contention in this regard is totally false. The opposite party no.2 stated about the income of the revisionist on the basis of salary slip and there was nothing false even though the application u/s 340 Cr.P.C. was filed by him to make her physical and mental harassment and that application was also dismissed by the learned trial court by order dated 18.01.2025 due to non appearance of the revisionist before the learned trial court, therefore, on this ground the order passed by the learned trial court dated 07.08.2024 cannot be set aside and cannot be said to be illegal. The amount of maintenance Rs.10,000/- per month can also not be said to be disproportionate to the monthly salary of the revisionist but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that opposite party no.2 is wife of the revisionist who is living separate from him due to neglect on his part. The revisionist works as Technical Assistant in Agriculture Department and as per the salary slip for the month of February, 2019 the gross salary of the revisionist was Rs.32,091/- per month and net salary Rs.28,950/- per month and the order was passed in the year 2024, therefore, increase in the salary is quite natural. The revisionist has not disclosed his income in the year 2023-24 but it was stated by the opposite party no.2 that he gets salary Rs.40,000/- per month, and the court fixed the amount of Rs.10,000/- per month in favour of the wife as maintenance. No any material was filed by the revisionist to show that he incurs expenses on the maintenance and treatment of his parents and other family members. The amount of Rs.10,000/- as maintenance in favour of the wife is not more than 25% of his income. So far as the pendency of application u/s 340 Cr.P.C. is concerned, the learned trial court was expected to decide the application u/s 340 Cr.P.C. first and then the application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. but now the application u/s 340 Cr.P.C. is no more pending and has already been dismissed by the learned court in absence of parties, therefore, on the basis of pendency of application u/s 340 Cr.P.C. the order dated 07.08.2024 cannot be set aside since there is nothing before the learned trial court to decide. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court, therefore, it does not warrant any interference by this Court. So far as the amount of arrears of maintenance is concerned, it shall be paid by the revisionist to wife/opposite party no.2 in 12 equal installments alongwith the current amount of monthly maintenance and any amount which has already been received by the opposite party no.2 as interim maintenance shall also be subject to the adjustment in the final payment. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad