JUDGMENT : Z.A. Haq, J. Heard Mrs. A.A. Bhide, Advocate for the applicant (wife) and Shri A.J. Mirza, Advocate for the non-applicant (husband). 2. The applicant (wife) being dissatisfied with the amount of maintenance allowance granted by the Family Court, has filed this revision application. 3. The entitlement of the applicant (wife) to receive the amount of maintenance and the liability of the non-applicant (husband) to pay the maintenance allowance is not disputed. The findings recorded by the Family Court that the wife has proved that she is not having any source of income and that the husband is avoiding and refusing to pay maintenance amount are not challenged by the non-applicant. The only issue which is required to be considered in the revision application is whether the amount of maintenance allowance granted by the Family Court to the wife at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per month is proper and adequate and commensurate with the income of the non-applicant (husband). 4. The non-applicant is serving in S.R.P.F. as Head Constable. The documentary evidence on the record that is the salary slip of the non-applicant for January 2012 shows that the non-applicant was receiving salary of Rs. 19,911/- per month and after deductions he was receiving Rs. 7,875/- per month. The learned Advocate for the non-applicant has submitted that the deductions are towards the repayment of loan which the non-applicant has taken. 5. Considering the income of the non-applicant and the fact that the non-applicant is not having the liability of maintaining anyone except the applicant (wife), in my view, it would be appropriate to direct the non-applicant (husband) to pay maintenance allowance of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the applicant (wife). This amount of maintenance shall be paid by the non-applicant (husband) to the applicant (wife) from March 2016. 6. The criminal revision application is allowed in the above terms. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.