Dismissed¶18

Rachit Singhal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Sept 2025CRLR/5265/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 125 Cr.P.C. interim maintenance — prayer to set aside and reduce Rs. 30,000/- p.m. — husband's post-dispute resignation/unemployment plea rejected — ITR-based income about Rs. 1,50,000/- p.m. — wife's YouTube income held insufficient — wife living separate for sufficient reason — no illegality in Family Court, Ghaziabad order dated 15.07.2025 — criminal revision dismissed at admission stage — Allahabad High Court (Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.), September 9, 2025.

What did the court decide?

From the allegations made by the wife against the revisionist, the Court found that the wife is living separate from him for sufficient reason and is being neglected by the revisionist. ¶14

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim maintenance of Rs. 30,000/- per month fixed by the Family Court in favour of the wife should be set aside and reduced, given the revisionist's claim that he has resigned and is unemployed. +1 more

¶12

Court's answer

The Court declined to accept the revisionist's statement that after the dispute with his wife he resigned from I.B.M. India Pvt. Ltd. and is now unemployed, holding that as an efficient person he may have opportunity in another company.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

From the allegations made by the wife against the revisionist, the Court found that the wife is living separate from him for sufficient reason and is being neglected by the revisionist.

¶14

Key takeaways

On the basis of the revisionist's ITRs for assessment years 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25 (annual incomes of Rs. 9,78,670/-, Rs. 19,08,920 and Rs. 18,15,230/-), his income works out to about Rs. 1,50,000/- per month.ratio¶14
The wife has no regular source of income; although she operates a YouTube channel, the income from it is not sufficient, so she cannot be said to be able to maintain herself.ratio¶14
The maintenance of Rs. 30,000/- per month fixed by the trial court from the date of the application is not more than sufficient or disproportionate to the husband's income but is in accordance with the status of the husband and wife; there is no illegality or impropriety in the order dated 15.07.2025 and the revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal revision dismissed at the admission stage. The interim maintenance of Rs. 30,000/- per month awarded to the wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghaziabad (order dated 15.07.2025) was upheld. The Court held that the wife is living separate for sufficient reason, having been allegedly tortured, misbehaved with and refused entry to the matrimonial home by the husband. The husband's plea that he resigned from I.B.M. India Pvt. Ltd. after the dispute and is unemployed was rejected, the Court noting that his ITRs showed an income of about Rs. 1,50,000/- per month and that an efficient engineer could obtain employment elsewhere. The wife's YouTube channel earnings were held insufficient for her self-maintenance. The quantum was found in accordance with the status of the parties, with no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5265 of 2025

¶3

Rachit Singhal

¶4

.....Revisionist(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	: Eishan Mehta, Tejasvi Misra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 84

¶6

HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present criminal revision has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 15.07.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ghaziabad in Case No. 527 of 2024 (Smt. Shefali Vs. Rachit Singhal) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad.

¶9

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 apart from him and filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. with an application for interim maintenance as paper no. 20-ba which was decided on 15.07.2025 fixing the amount of maintenance Rs. 30,000/- per month in favour of wife/opposite party no. 2. The opposite party no. 2 is living separate from him without any sufficient cause. She was never subjected to torture and harassment either by the revisionist or by any member of his family in relation to demand of dowry. She is not ready to live with the revisionist/husband though he is willing to keep her as wife. Further submitted that the opposite party no. 2 runs YouTube channel and makes earning of Rs. 50,000/- per month and has also completed V.F.X. Designing course which shows that she is efficient for making income and able to maintain herself as having sufficient means. On the other hand, the revisionist was working as an Engineer in I.B.M. India Pvt. Ltd. and was getting salary Rs. 2,05,780/- and after deduction Rs. 158,934/- per month but

¶10

CRLR No. 5265 of 2025

¶11

¶12

now after dispute with the wife he has resigned from the service and he is unemployed. He has no any source of income but is supported by his relatives like sister. The learned trial court has fixed the amount Rs. 30,000/per month as maintenance on the basis of income of the revisionist shown in ITR for the previous years and now he is not working in the aforesaid company but this fact was not taken into consideration by the learned trial court but fixed the amount as aforesaid, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by learned trial court dated 15.07.2025 and reduce the amount.

¶13

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

¶14

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 learned trial court dated 15.07.2025, it appears that there is allegation by the opposite party no. 2 against the revisionist that she was tortured and misbehaved by him and thereafter she was neglected on the part of the revisionist and when she went to sasural from her maika, the revisionist did not allow her to enter into his house that was the reason she is living apart from her husband. On the other hand, the revisionist has denied the allegations made by the wife/opposite party no. 2 and alleged that she is living apart from him without any sufficient reason and also lodged false F.I.R. against him and other members of his family. From the allegations made by the opposite party no. 2 against the revisionist, it appears that the wife/opposite party no. 2 is living separate from him for sufficient reason and is being neglected by the revisionist who was working in I.B.M. India Pvt. Ltd. company and getting salary of Rs. 2,05,780/- and after deduction it becomes Rs. 158,934/- per month. He has also filed ITRs for the assessment year 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25 showing his annual income Rs. 9,78,670/-, Rs. 19,08,920 and Rs. 18,15,230/- and when divided into months it becomes about Rs. 1,50,000/- per month. The statement of the revisionist that after dispute with the wife, he has resigned from the company and now he is unemployed, cannot be accepted as true. If he is supposed to have resigned from the I.B.M. India Pvt. Ltd. company, he may have opportunity in other company since he is efficient person. On the other hand there is no any regular source of income of opposite party no. 2. Though she operates YouTube channel but there is not sufficient income from that source, therefore, it cannot be said that she is able to maintain herself as having sufficient source of income. It is to note that the wife is entitled for maintenance from the husband according to his living status. The learned

¶15

CRLR No. 5265 of 2025

¶16

¶17

trial court has fixed the amount of maintenance Rs. 30,000/- per month from the date of application for interim maintenance which cannot be said to be more than sufficient or disproportionate to the income of the husband but it is in accordance with the status of husband and wife, therefore, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order dated 15.07.2025 passed by learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage.

¶18

Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed .

¶19

September 9, 2025 Anurag Singh

¶20

(Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)

¶21

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

Rachit Singhal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rachit Singhal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases