*1* 8revn118o21 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 118 OF 2021 DNYANESHWAR BHANUDAS GAIKWAD VERSUS RUKHMABAI DNYANESHWAR GAIKWAD AND OTHERS ... Shri Rakhunde Pravin B., Advocate for the Applicant. Shri M.A. Aher, APP for the Respondents/ State. ... CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. DATE : 15 September 2026 (Through VC) P. C. :- 1. Heard. 2. The applicant/ husband is challenging the order dated 30.08.2018 passed by the learned JMFC, Jamner, in Criminal Misc. Application No.222/2017 whereby, he has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.4000/- per month to the respondent/ wife from the date of the application. Criminal Appeal No.69/2019 filed by the applicant against the order dated 30.08.2018 is also dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, vide the judgment and order dated 22.07.2021. Hence, the applicant/ husband is before this Court. 2026:BHC-AUG:42720 *2* 8revn118o21 3. The learned advocate for the applicant submits that the amount of maintenance is too excessive. The applicant does not have sound earning capacity so that he can pay such huge maintenance. The matter requires consideration and therefore, the notice be issued to the respondent/ wife. 4. Upon specific query as to whether, the applicant/ husband is regularly paying the said amount of maintenance to the respondent/ wife, the learned advocate fails to give any satisfactory answer. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant revision application. Moreover, the maintenance of Rs.4000/- per month is not at all exorbitant. So also, on perusal of the reasons recorded by the Courts below, I do not find any perversity, manifest illegality or non- consideration of material evidence warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction. 5. In view of the above, the Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. kps ( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. )