Hon’ble Aniruddha Singh, J.—Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.

2. This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., has been filed against judgment and order dated 6.11.2017 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Jalaun at Orai in Criminal Misc. Case No. 40/2016 (Smt. Kavita Verma and another v. Vimal Kumar Verma) whereby application of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 namely Smt. Kavita Verma(wife) and Ansh (son) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been allowed and revisionist was directed to pay Rs. 8000/- per month to his wife and Rs. 5000/- per month to his son.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that maintenance awarded by the Court below is higher and his wife/opposite party No. 2 is not willing to live with him, hence no maintenance can be awarded to her and son. Opposite party No. 2 is highly educated and is able to teach children and she has source of income. It has also been argued that wife/opposite party No. 1 did not obey judgment and decree dated 27.11.2017 passed in Marriage petition No. 52/2016 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, against which she has filed First Appeal No. 57/2018 und