1 2025:CGHC:17758 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 499 of 2025 1 - Smt. Latabai Chandra W/o Ramesh Kumar Chandra Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Uchchbhitthi, P.S. Kosir, Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh At Present R/o Borsi, P.S. Birra, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 2 - Sukanya D/o Ramesh Kumar Chandra Aged About 11 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Latabai Chandra W/o Ramesh Kumar Chandra, R/o Village Uchchbhitthi, P.S. Kosir, Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh At Present R/o Borsi, P.S. Birra, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 3 - Somnath S/o Ramesh Kumar Chandra Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Latabai Chandra W/o Ramesh Kumar Chandra, R/o Village Uchchbhitthi, P.S. Kosir, Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh At Present R/o Borsi, P.S. Birra, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Ramesh Kumar Chandra S/o Jairam Chandra Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Uchchbhitthi, P.S. Kosir, Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Banhiman Roy, Advocate 2 S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order On Board 17/04/2025 1. Heard on admission. 2. The present criminal revision has been filed by the applicants against the order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Janjgir, Dist- Janjgir-Champa in Case No. 223/2024 whereby the learned Family Court has granted interim maintenance of Rs. 1000/- each to the applicant Nos. 2 & 3 which is payable from the date of order. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the application for grant of interim maintenance with respect to the applicant No. 1/ wife has been rejected and the meager amount of Rs. 1000/- to the applicant Nos. 2 & 3 have been granted by the learned Family Court which is erroneous. The respondent is having sufficient means to his monthly income, the amount of Rs. 1000/- per month to the children are very less, even it is not sufficient for their educational fees and other expenses. There is no reason for not granting to the interim maintenance to the wife whereas the allegation is that, due to the harassment and cruelty of the wife was compel to reside separately from him along with her children, therefore, in such a less amount, she can not survive along with her children and therefore, the amount of interim maintenance may be enhanced. 4. I have heard learned learned counsel for the applicants and perused the material annexed with the petition. 5. From perusal of the order, it appears that the allegation levelled against the respondent by the applicant No. 1, that he committed cruelty with her and the applicant No. 1 was being thrown out from his house and he is also having extra marital affair are to be decided after leading evidence of the parties. When an application under Section 97 and 98 of Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant No. 1/ wife before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, she herself disclosed that there was no harassment with her. Whether the applicant No. 1 was residing separately without 3 any sufficient cause or not are the disputed question of fact and are to be decided after leading cogent evidence by the party. 6. The quantum of maintenance always lies with the discretion of the learned Family Court and any interference at this stage would may prejudice the final outcome of the application filed by the applicants under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The quantum of maintenance is to be decided on the basis of the income of the parties, their standard of living and day to day expenses on the basis of evidence produced by the parties. The learned Family Court has already observed in its order that the reply of the non- applicant has already been received and the case is fixed for recording evidence of the parties and there is no possibility of any delay in conclusion of the trial. Therefore, in the aforementioned circumstances, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order and therefore, the present Criminal Revision is dismissed as the motion stage itself. 7. However, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the case and conclude the case as early as possible. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the present criminal revision is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Sagrika SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.04.22 10:03:37 +0530