The High Court dismissed a criminal revision seeking to set aside an interim maintenance order of Rs. 5,000/month under Section 125 Cr.P.C., finding it reasonable given the husband's employment and the wife's lack of income.
Criminal Revision No. 1468 of 2025 dismissed at the admission stage.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56277
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1468 of 2025
Revisionist :- Riyasat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Mahipal Singh 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 filed with prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 17.01.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bijnor in Case No.583/2020 (Sanjeena Khatoon @ Sajeena and others vs. Riyasat) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and also prays to stay the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 17.01.2025.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case admittedly opposite party no.2 is first wife of the revisionist and opposite party nos.3, 4 & 5 are minor children out of which one child is living with the wife and two are living with the revisionist. Further submitted that wife was never neglected by the revisionist but she started living separately from the husband with one minor child from the year 2020. The revisionist filed a suit for Restitution of Conjugal Rights which was decreed but she did not come to live with him that was the reason he pronounced talak to the opposite party no.2 and entered into second marriage and since then the second wife is living with him. The revisionist is a labourer and has liability to maintain his second wife and other members of his family and also two minor children born from the opposite party no.2. Learned trial court without considering the earning and the liabilities of the revisionist passed the order dated 17.01.2025 on an application for interim maintenance application in faovur of the opposite party no.2/wife amounting to Rs.3000/per month to the wife and Rs.2000/- for minor child in total Rs.5000/- from the date of application which cannot be said to be lawful and appropriate, therefore, request to set it aside and allow the revision.
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 passed by learned trial court dated 17.01.2025, it appears that opposite party no.2 is wife of the revisionist and opposite party nos.3 to 5 are minor children out of which one is living with the wife who is residing separately form the husband from the year 2020 due to neglect on the part of the husband. Later on, the revisionist has entered into second marriage and two children from the previous wife are living with him. He is able bodied person and as per the record he works in driving and transportation. On the other hand opposite party no.2/wife is a housewife and has no any source of income to maintain herself alongwith child and the revisionist being husband of opposite party no.2 is under bounden duty to maintain his wife and minor children. In this way, the order passed by learned trial court dated 17.01.2025 allowing the amount of maintenance Rs.3000/- per month to the wife and Rs.2000/- per month for the minor children, cannot be said to be excessive and beyond the paying capacity of the revisionist and can also not be said to make the wife to live lavishly but it is less than sufficient. There appears no any illegality and impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admission stage itself.
Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Ashok Gupta
Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the interim maintenance order of Rs. 5,000 per month under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is lawful and appropriate considering the petitioner's earning capacity and liabilities.
Whether the impugned order is excessive or beyond the paying capacity of the revisionist.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Riyasat
State Of U.P.
Sanjeena Khatoon (and others)
Subhash Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
