Allahabad High Court
KRISHAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The trial court's order awarding maintenance at 25% of the husband's net salary is correct and not liable to interference.
Summary
The revisionist, a government teacher, challenged a Family Court order granting his wife and daughter maintenance of Rs.16,000 per month, arguing that salary deductions reduced his net income and the amount was excessive. The State contended that the trial court correctly applied the Supreme Court's principle that 25% of the husband's salary is appropriate for maintenance and that deductions are for the husband's benefit and should not lower the maintenance amount. The High Court examined the trial court's award of 25% of the net salary, referencing Kalyan Dey Chowdhury (which endorses a 25% benchmark) and Deepa Joshi (which holds that salary deductions cannot be considered to reduce maintenance). Finding the trial court's order consistent with these precedents, the Court saw no illegality or perversity. Consequently, the revision was dismissed and the Family Court was directed to ensure the employer deducts the maintenance from the revisionist's salary and remits it to the wife.
Issues considered
- Whether deductions from the husband's salary can be taken into account while fixing maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Whether awarding maintenance at 25% of the husband's net salary is appropriate under Supreme Court jurisprudence.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125
Subjects
- maintenance
- Section 125 CrPC
- salary deductions
- family court
- revision
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5516 of 2026
Krishan Kumar
.....Revisionist(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Kharag Singh, Mahendra Pal Singh
Gaur
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 86
HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.
1. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that he has preferred the
instant criminal revision with the relief which has been mentioned in the
prayer clause of the revision.
2. The relief which has been mentioned in the prayer clause is delineated
below:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to allow the Criminal Revision and set aside
Judgment and order dated 15.07.2026 passed by the Principal Judge,
Family Court, Sambhal, in Case No. 192 of 2024 (Smt. Ruchi and another
Vs. Krishan Kumar), Under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., Police Station
Chandausi, District Sambhal, otherwise the Revisionist shall suffer
irreparable loss and injury.
It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the effect
and operation of the Judgment and order dated 15.07.2026 passed by the
Principal Judge, Family Court, Sambhal, in Case No. 192 of 2024 (Smt.
Ruchi and another Vs. Krishan Kumar), Under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.,
Police Station Chandausi District Sambhal, otherwise the Revisionist
shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."
3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is a
Government teacher and, as per his affidavit filed in the year 2025, the
revisionist is getting a salary to the tune of Rs. 62,842/-. He further
CRLR No. 5516 of 2026
2
submits that there are certain voluntary deductions from the salary of the
revisionist. Learned counsel for the revisionist further submits that the
amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 16,000/- in total, granted to the
wife and daughter, is not commensurate with the source of income of the
revisionist-husband. Therefore, the impugned order may be modified or
set aside.
4. Learned State Counsel, Shri Pankaj Kumar, submits that in the internal
page of the impugned order dated 15.07.2026, it has been mentioned by
the trial court that in March 2026, after deductions, the revisionist is
getting a net salary to the tune of Rs. 64,019/-, therefore, having regard to
the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kalyan Dey
Chowdhury Vs. Rita Dey Chowdhury, AIR 2017 SC 2383, 25% of the
salary may be considered as an appropriate amount towards
maintenance. He further submits that Hon'ble Apex Court in Deepa Joshi
Vs. Gaurav Joshi, 2026 SCC Online SC 597, has held that deductions
made from the salary are for the benefit of the husband/revisionist and,
therefore, cannot be taken into consideration for determining the amount
of maintenance. He further submits that, in the present case, the trial court
has already awarded maintenance equivalent to one-fourth of the
revisionist's salary, therefore, no interference is required in the impugned
order.
5. This Court, upon considering the submissions advanced by learned
counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, finds that the trial
court, vide order dated 15.07.2026, has awarded maintenance to the wife
and daughter equivalent to 25% of the net salary of the revisionist,
keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Kalyan Dey Chowdhury (supra).
6. This Court further finds that, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Deepa
Joshi (supra) has held that the deductions made from the salary of the
revisionist/husband are for his own benefit and, therefore, such
deductions cannot be taken into consideration for reducing the amount of
maintenance payable to the wife. In the present case, the amount of
maintenance awarded by the trial court is in accordance with the aforesaid
principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
CRLR No. 5516 of 2026
3
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court finds no
illegality or perversity in the impugned order dated 15.07.2026 warranting
interference by this Court at this stage, therefore, the impugned order does
not require any interference.
8. Accordingly, the revision is dismissed.
9. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Sambhal is directed to pass an order
directing the concerned higher educational authority/employer to deduct
the amount of maintenance from the salary of the revisionist in
compliance with the order dated 15.07.2026 and credit the same into the
verified bank account of opposite party No. 2- wife.
(Praveen Kumar Giri,J.)
September 9, 2026
K.Tiwari
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHNA KANT TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…