Disposed¶15

Lokesh Siwach v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2025CRLR/3540/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC CRLR 3540 of 2025; Section 125 CrPC maintenance revision disposed finally; adequacy of Rs. 4000/- p.m. maintenance upheld; no illegality found; husband's claimed Rs. 17,000/- p.m. private-sector salary unsupported on record; adjustment of Section 24 HMA interim maintenance Rs. 3000/- p.m. against Section 125 award; second wife; agreement of 23.12.2020 to live separately denied by wife; Family Court No. 2 Meerut Case No. 205 of 2021; judge Subhash Chandra Sharma; decision 10.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to set aside the trial court's maintenance order was not accepted; the revision was disposed of finally, with the clarification that maintenance paid or received by the wife under any other court's order shall be adjusted against the Rs. 4000/- per month fixed herein. ¶15

Lokesh Siwach Vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the trial court's order dated 05.04.2025 awarding Rs. 4000/- per month maintenance to the wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was illegally passed or excessive, warranting its setting aside in this criminal revision. +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

The maintenance amount of Rs. 4000/- per month fixed by the learned trial court in favour of the wife cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

No regular source of income of the revisionist is established on record; the wife's claim that he works in a private company earning Rs. 17,000/- per month as salary is unsupported on record.

¶13

Key takeaways

There is no illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the learned trial court and it does not warrant interference by this Court.ratio¶13
As already directed by the trial court in its order dated 5.4.2025, any amount of maintenance being paid or received by the wife by order passed by any other court will be subject to adjustment against the amount fixed in the present case.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Criminal Revision No. 3540 of 2025 (Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.), disposed of finally on 10.09.2025. The revisionist Lokesh Siwach challenged the order dated 05.04.2025 of the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2, Meerut (Case No. 205 of 2021, Smt. Sapna Vs. Lokesh Siwach) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. awarding Rs. 4000/- per month maintenance to his wife, arguing she is highly qualified (M.A., B.Ed., B.T.C., UPTET) and capable of earning, and that her Rs. 3000/- per month interim maintenance under Section 24 in the pending Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act case was not adjusted. The Court held that the parties are husband and wife living separately, the 23.12.2020 agreement to live separately was denied by the wife herself, nothing on record shows the revisionist earns the claimed Rs. 17,000/- per month salary, the fixed amount 'cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient', and there is no illegality or impropriety warranting interference. It reiterated the trial court's own direction that maintenance paid or received by the wife under any other court's order stands subject to adjustment in the present amount.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3540 of 2025

¶2

Lokesh Siwach

¶3

.....Revisionist(s)

¶4

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	:	Sanjay Kr. Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 84

¶6

HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with prayer to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 05.04.2025 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2, Meerut in Case No. 205 of 2021 (Smt. Sapna Vs. Lokesh Siwach), under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Pallawpuram, District Meerut.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the opposite party no. 2 is second wife of the revisionist. She was married to him in the year 2019 and after marriage she started misbehaving with the revisionist and other members of his family. She left his house and started living in her maika. There was an agreement between the parties on 23.12.2020 to live separate from each other but later on denied by the wife. She filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which was allowed by the learned trial court vide order dated 05.04.2025 fixing the amount of maintenance Rs. 4000/- per month in favour of wife though she is highly qualified as M.A. B.Ed., B.T.C. and has also passed UPTET exam. She is efficient for making income but this fact was not considered by learned trial court and amount was awarded illegally. It is also submitted that she is getting interim maintenance Rs. 3000/- per month under Section 24 in case under Section 13 Hindu marriage Act but that has also not been adjusted by the learned trial court while awarding the maintenance in present case, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by learned trial court.

¶10

CRLR No. 3540 of 2025

¶11

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.

¶13

On 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 order passed by the learned trial court, it appears that the revisionist and opposite party no. 2 are husband and wife and she is living separate from him. The fact of agreement between the parties for living separate from each other has been denied by the wife herself. She has stated about misbehaviour on the part of the revisionist with her that is the reason she is living apart from him under compulsion. There is a case under Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act pending between the parties which was filed by the revisionist himself in which under Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act Rs. 3000/- per month was granted as interim maintenance in favour of wife. There is no any regular source of income said to be made by the revisionist, though it is stated by the wife that he is working in private company and getting Rs. 17,000/- per month as salary but there is nothing on record to show that he is getting such amount as salary. The learned trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 4000/- in favour of wife which cannot be said to be excessive or more than sufficient. The learned trial court itself has directed in its order dated 05.04.2025 that if any amount is being paid to the wife as maintenance, it will be subject to adjustment in the amount of present case. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order passed by learned trial court and it does not warrant interference by this Court.

¶14

Again, it is made clear that the learned trial court while passing the order dated 5.4.2025, has already directed that the amount of maintenance being paid or being received by the wife by order passed by any other court, will be subject to adjustment in the present amount.

¶15

Accordingly, the present revision is disposed of finally.

¶16

September 10, 2025 Anurag Singh

¶17

(Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lokesh Siwach v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lokesh Siwach v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases