Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139067 Court No. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 360 of 2025 Revisionist :- Lalit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Sunil Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- Alka Srivastava,G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgment & order dated 29.10.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Baghpat in Criminal Appeal No. 64 of 2024 (Lalit Vs. Smt. Disha and another) as well as order dated 11.06.2024 passed by the learned court of Magistrate, Gram Nyayalay, Teshil Badaut, District Baghpat in Complaint Case No. 90 of 2021 (Smt. Disha Vs. Lalit and others) under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Police Station Chhaprauli, District Baghpat. Further prays to stay the effect and operation of the aforesaid orders during the pendency of the present criminal revision. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the opposite party no. 2 is wife of the revisionist who is living separate from him and filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which was decided by the learned trial court by order dated 11.06.2024 fixing the amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month as maintenance in favour of minor child and Rs. 30,000/- payable as compensation for physical and mental torture of opposite party no. 2. He further submits that he filed an appeal against that order which was also decided by the learned Appellate court by order dated 29.10.2024 but the amount remained the same. He further submits that the revisionist never subjected the opposite party no. 2 to physical or mental torture but she herself subjected the revisionist and other members of his family to torture. He also submits that his mother is an old lady who was beaten by the opposite party no. 2 for which he has lodged the F.I.R. at the police station though that F.I.R. was not on record. He also submits that the marriage was performed in the year 2015 and in the matrimonial house she completed her course of A.N.M. and thereafter got employment and gets salary Rs. 30,000/- per month. For the purpose of making harassment of the revisionist and others members of his family she filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act against him, his old parents, unmarried sister and also married sister and brother-in-law. He further submits that married sister and brother-in-law has no concern with the matter even though they have been subjected to harassment by filing complaint with false allegations against them. This shows the cruelty and torture on the part of the opposite party no. 2 against the revisionist even though the learned trial court has fixed the amount of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation in favour of wife for physical and mental torture. He also submits that she gets salary about Rs. 30,000/- per month and is able to maintain herself and also the minor child even though the learned trial court has fixed the amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month for maintenance in favour of minor child, therefore, request to set aside the orders passed by the learned court of Magistrate and the learned Appellate court. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case on account of physical and mental torture by the revisionist and other members of his family the opposite party no. 2 started living separate from them in her maika. She works as nurse and gets salary as aforesaid but the learned trial court has not granted any amount of maintenance in her favour except the amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month as maintenance in favour of minor child who was born out of the wedlock and there is a joint liability on the husband and wife to maintain the child. For physical and mental torture Rs. 30,000/- as compensation has been fixed by the learned courts. This amount cannot be said to be excessive. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of material on record, the orders passed by the learned trial court as well as the learned Appellate court, it appears that the wife/opposite party no. 2 is living apart from the revisionist and working as A.N.M. and getting about Rs. 30,000/- per month as salary and is able to maintain herself. On the other hand, the revisionist is also M.B.A. degree holder and efficient in making income. In view of his efficiency and qualification the amount so fixed in favour of minor child as maintenance Rs. 3,000/- cannot be said to be excessive. So far as the amount Rs. 30,000/- for physical and mental torture is concerned it seems to be excessive, therefore, it is liable to be reduced to Rs. 10,000/-. Accordingly, this criminal revision is partly allowed. Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad