Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:26924 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4661 of 2024 Revisionist :- Sunil Datt Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Jeet Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akhilesh Srivastava,G.A.,Saksham Srivastava Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. Heard learned counsel for revisionist, learned AGA for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2. Instant revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 24.6.2024 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Court No. 2, Aligarh in Case No. 288 of 2016 (Smt. Madhu Sharma and another Versus Sunil Dutt Sharma), whereby the Additional Principal Judge, Court No. 2, Aligarh has enhanced the amount of maintenance awarded to the applicants by Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Aligarh vide judgement and order dated 29.9.2008 from Rs. 4000/- per month to Rs. 5000/- per month in exercise of powers under Section 127 (2) CrPC. Learned counsel for revisionist has submitted that the revisionist was posted as a teacher in Hindu Inter College Aligarh where he used to teach Hindi and Sanskrit subjects and he has only one source of income. He also submits that the applicants-opposite parties were residing in the house of revisionist and this fact has been admitted by the applicants before the court below. The court below has enhanced the amount of maintenance from Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 5000/- only on assumption made in para 14 of the judgment wherein it is stated that the applicant has filed her affidavit that the circumstances have changed since 2008, rate of inflation has increased and at the time of disposal of maintenance case salary of opposite party was Rs. 11909/-. He has admitted in his cross examination in the year, 2019 that his salary was Rs. 63000/- and now the applicant has retired from service but neither the applicants- opposite party nor revisionist has filed any detail of his retiral / pensionary benefits but keeping in view the said salary and his tenure of service, he would have been getting more than Rs. 35,000/- as pension. Under changed circumstances, no prayer has been made with regard to maintenance of three children. The applicant-opposite party has prayed only for enhancement of maintenance payable to her. With these observations, the court below has enhanced the amount of maintenance. Learned counsel further submitted that the case of revisionist falls under new pension scheme. He was not extended benefit of regular pension. He retired on 31.3.2021. He joined as Assistant Teacher in the year, 2007, i. e. after the year, 2005. He has also filed a copy of the HDFC Life Policy Document New Immediate Annuity, which shows that premium was paid at Rs. 4,10,913.65/- and annuity payment is Rs. 2212/- per month. He also submits that a person getting only Rs. 2212/- cannot be in a position to pay Rs. 5000/- per month to his wife as maintenance. Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submits that the revisionist has not filed any paper before the Court nor any condition was made before the court below, therefore, opposite party no. 2 is not in a position to trace all these documents. Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and giving a thoughtful consideration to the facts of the case and perusing material on record, and impugned judgment and order, it may be observed that the observation of the court below is not supported by any documentary evidence, whereas the revisionist has filed document in support of his contention, which shows that the monthly annuity is only Rs. 2212/-. In this situation, the impugned judgement and order dated 24.6.2024 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Court No. 2, Aligarh in Case No. 288 of 2016 (Smt. Madhu Sharma and another Versus Sunil Dutt Sharma) deserves to be set aside and is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the court below to be decided afresh in the light of the new facts pleaded by the revisionist on the basis of the said document, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties to lead fresh evidence, if any, and returning specific finding on the HDFC Life Policy Document New Immediate Annuity policy. As the matter is old one, the court below is directed to expedite the disposal of the case under Section 127 Cr. P. C. afresh without granting any undue adjournment to any of the parties, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Apart from above, the revisionist is directed to pay maintenance to opposite party no. 2 at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month regularly during pendency of the case. The revision is allowed in part. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 HR Digitally signed by :- HEMANT RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad