SHAILESH KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Gauri Shankar Yadav, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Yogeshwar Rai, learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record.

(2.) This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist seeking to set aside the order dated 01-08- 2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ballia in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1044 of 2021 (Smt. Meena Devi vs. Shailesh Kumar Yadav) under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C., whereby the revisionist was directed to pay maintenance of Rs.18,000.00 per month to Opposite Party No.2 with effect from the date of filing of the application under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C.

(3.) The sole argument advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist is that the revisionist has performed a second marriage with the consent of Opposite Party No.2 and also bears the liability of three children born out of the second wedlock. Hence, it is contended that the amount of maintenance awarded by the Court below is excessive, exorbitant, and not commensurate with the income of the revisionist.