AJAY VERMAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and perused the material available on record.

(2.) The present criminal revision has been preferred against the impugned order dtd. 20/12/2025 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, District Etawah in Case No. 374 of 2020 (Smt. Priti Verman and another v. Ajay Verman), under Sec. 127 Cr.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Etawah, whereby the learned Family Court has enhanced the maintenance payable by the revisionist, increasing the amount from Rs.3,500.00 to Rs.8,000.00 per month in favour of the wife and from Rs.1,500.00to Rs.4,000.00 per month in favour of the minor son.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is employed as a Keyman in the Railways and is earning approximately Rs.55,000.00 per month. It is contended that the order passed by the learned Family Court enhancing the maintenance amount is erroneous, arbitrary and excessive, inasmuch as the financial capacity of the revisionist has not been properly appreciated. It is further submitted that the revisionist is a Group-D employee in the Railway Department and his income is limited. Apart from meeting his own day-to-day expenses, the revisionist is also under a legal and moral obligation to maintain his aged parents. It is further urged that the revisionist is also required to extend financial support to his unmarried brother and sisters, which imposes additional financial burden upon him.