JUDGMENT :

SURENDRA SINGH-I, J.

1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Chandan Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the opposite parties.

2. By means of the instant criminal revision, the revisionist has assailed the impugned judgment and order dated 01.03.2023 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gorakhpur in Criminal Case No. 657 of 2018 (Neetu Singh and Others vs. Rana Pratap Singh) filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

3. By the impugned judgment and order, the trial court has allowed the criminal case instituted by the opposite party no. 1 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and granted maintenance allowance of Rs. 15,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 1 (wife) and Rs. 5000/- each to her children i.e. opposite party no. 2, Keerti Singh, and opposite party no. 3, Krishna Singh from the date of filing of the criminal case. The opposite party nos. 2 and 3 were provided maintenance till they attain the age of majority.

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the trial Court has passed the impugned order against the weight of evidence on record as well as law applicable to the facts of the case. The trial court has misread