1 2025:CGHC:27079 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 501 of 2024 Smt Hemlata Deshmukh W/o Domendra Deshmukh Aged About 32 Years R/o Village - Devri, Kachandur, Tah.- Gundardehi, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) Present Address- Vivekanand, Road No. 04. Durg, P.S.- City Kotwali, Tahsil And District - Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Domendra Deshmukh S/o Surendra Kumar Deshmukh Aged About 36 Years R/o Village - Devri, Kachandur, Tah.- Gundardehi, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) Office Addres- Assistant Engineer, Electrical And Mechanical Department, Near The Stadium , In Front Of Irain Dera, Pwd Office, Durg (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Tarun Dansena, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Chandrashekhar Bajpai, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Tarun Dansena, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Chandrashekhar Bajpai, learned counsel appearing for the private respondent. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the impugned order dated 30.03.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.) in Misc. Cri. Case No. 1132/2023, whereby the RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 learned Family Court, Durg, District – Durg, has partly allowed the application for grant of interim maintenance, and directed the non- applicant to pay Rs. 7,000/- per month to the applicant as the interim maintenance. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the application for grant of interim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC was preferred by the applicant against non-applicant stating inter-alia that the applicant was married with non-applicant on 12.02.2018 at Vivekanand, Road no. 04, Durg, District Durg (C.G.). The non-applicant did not like the applicant from the beginning, that is why he did not allow the applicant to have a child and as part of a plan to get a divorce from applicant, he started collecting false evidence with the aim of making the applicant wrong and character traits, tried to put. The applicant had left applicant in civil line quarter without informing her. The applicant in a criminal conspiracy, made a false complaint against applicant and filed a complaint in the women's Police Station and sent a notice of counseling, then submitted a written complaint about the atrocities of the period in which the applicant was sleeping and then the non-applicant did not appear, then a crime of registered under Section 498A and 34 of I.P.C. was against non- applicant and his relatives. The non-applicant had also complained about the relationship of an unknown person named Rahul with the applicant, thus the non-applicant has been harassing the applicant from the very beginning and has separated applicant from may 2023 without any sufficient reason. The applicant is a housewife and has no any income, whereas the non-applicant earns Rs. 64,548/- per month by working in a government service and all facilities. The non-applicant is liable to maintain the present applicant as she has no income and the non applicant is a person having sufficient means. The present applicant 3 prayed for Rs. 7,000/- may kindly be awarded as maintenance. Non- applicant having being served notice by the learned Family Court, appeared and filed reply before the learned Family Court and denied the contention of application under Section 125 of the CrPC, filed by the applicant. It is stated by the non-applicant that a house was purchased by him with the help of father of the applicant at Durg which is registered in the name of the applicant. It is further stated by the entire golden and silver ornaments are in the possession of the applicant. On the instruction of applicant a house was purchased and renovated, then the applicant did not come to her matrimonial house but the non-applicant went to her house to meet her. Being harassed by the act of the applicant he preferred an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Principal Judge, Family Court Durg in which the applicant appeared and orally told that she is willing to get divorce. It is alleged by the non-applicant that the applicant is an independent life wisher lady and she does not want to live with the non applicant. It is further stated by the non-applicant that he loves very much to his wife and willing to take her to his house. It is further stated by the non-applicant that he is also agreed to comply the every terms and condition imposed by the applicant. It is alleged by the non-applicant that applicant has a love affair since before marriage and it is still going on which comes within the category of character less lady. The non-applicant, mentioning the aforesaid reason prayed before the learned Family Court to partly allowed the interim application filed by the applicant. The application filed by the applicant was partly allowed and maintenance allowance Rs. 7000/- per month granted to the applicant. Hence, this revision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant who is the wife of the non-applicant has been ordered to be paid the 4 interim maintenance to the tune of Rs. 7,000/- per month by the non- applicant/husband and she has come up before this Court for enhancement of the amount for interim maintenance, therefore, the impugned order dated 30.03.2024 is bad in law, perverse, arbitrary, erroneous, and the same is liable to be modified. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the impugned order dated 30.03.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.) in Misc. Cri. Case No. 1132/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, Durg, District – Durg, has partly allowed the application for grant of interim maintenance, and directed the non-applicant to pay Rs. 7,000/- per month to the applicant as the interim maintenance, and he further submits that the interim maintenance which has been ordered to be paid to the applicant cannot be said to be meager amount, and there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the impugned order, therefore, the instant revision filed by the applicant/complainant is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and from the perusal of the orders of the trial Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, the interim maintenance of Rs. 7,000/- which has been ordered to be paid to the applicant by non-applicant cannot be said to be meager amount and it is clear that after considering all the materials and after applying mind the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.) has passed the impugned judgment and order 5 dated 30.03.2024 in Misc. Cri. Case No. 1132/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, Durg, District – Durg, has partly allowed the application for grant of interim maintenance, and directed the non- applicant to pay Rs. 7,000/- per month to the applicant as the interim maintenance, and there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same. 8. In view of the above, the present criminal revision is dismissed. 9. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order as well as the original records to the concerned trial Court within a week from today, for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar