1 / 4 2025:CGHC:5686 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 605 of 2023 1 - Ratan Das S/o Late Subhat Das, Aged About 45 Years 2 - Smt. Chaya Malakar, W/o Nirmalendu Malakar Aged About 62 Years (Husband Name Wrongly Mentioned As Nirmal In Impugned Order) 3 - Smt. Anima Das W/o Late Subhat Das. Aged About 92 Years 4 - Nilotpal Malakar S/o Nirmal Malakar, Aged About 21 Years All Applicant R/o. Hari Nagar, Near Mandal Kirana Store, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus 1 - Smt. Vandana Das W/o Ratan Das Aged About 38 Years 2 - Kumari Ritu Das D/o Ratan Das Aged About 19 Years 3 - Kumari Riya Das D/o Ratan Das Aged About 17 Years, Through Mother Smt. Vandana Das, W/o Ratan Das, All R/o Near Shubham K Mart, Santoshi Nagar, PS Tikrapara, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Akash Kumar Kundu, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 30/01/2025 ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.02.12 11:19:13 +0530 2 / 4 1. The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 06/04/2023 passed by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, C.G. in Criminal Appeal No.32/2023, wherein the Sessions Judge has dismissed the appeal under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence and upheld the order dated 05/08/2022 passed by the JMFC, Raipur whereby a monthly interim maintenance of Rs.5000/- has been ordered. 2. The brief facts of this case are that the applicant and respondent were married on 08.12.2002 at Bhilai (C.G.) under Hindu Rites and rituals and thereafter the respondent came to reside with the applicant at Raipur. The two daughters were born out of the wedlock, who are arrayed as respondent no.2 & 3. It is the case of the applicants that after marriage respondent no.1 was reluctant to live with the old aged mother of the applicant and often misbehaved with the applicant as well as his mother. The respondent no.1 also frequently and without giving any information to the applicant used to go away to her parental home at Bhilai for several weeks. It is the further case of the applicants that even after the birth of two daughters the misbehavior of the respondent no.1 continued and on 20.04.2016 respondent no.1 on a trivial household issue forcefully slammed the head of the mother of the applicant against the wall resulting into injury in the head of the mother of the applicant. Thereafter, a complaint was also made over this incident which was registered under Section 155 CrPC by Police Station Tikrapara Raipur stating it to be family matter. Thereafter, in July 2019 respondent no.1 even assaulted the applicant with a bat on the legs of the applicant for which the applicant had to take treatment at hospital. 3 / 4 3. Thereafter, Respondent no.1 on 13.08.2019 after assaulting the mother of the applicant locked her inside her room without food and water and the applicant No.1 rescued her mother when he came back home and a complaint in this regard was also made. On 12/03/2020, respondent No.1 deserted the applicant No.1 and shifted to her parental home at Bhilai along with two daughters and she returned to the house of the applicant in July, 2022. Respondent No.1 filed a case of Domestic Violence before the Court below along with an application for interim maintenance. The applicants filed the reply to the said case and denied the averments therein. Thereafter, the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur has passed the order of granting interim maintenance. Hence, this revision. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would contend that the applicant No.1 has become permanently disabled on account of assault made by the Respondent No.1/wife, however, the Court below has granted interim maintenance from the applicant to the Respondent No.1. He would next contend that Respondent No.1 has filed the false case of domestic violence against the applicant and other family members only for the reason that the property has been transferred to Applicant No.2. He would lastly contend that the respondent No.1/wife has deserted the husband without any lawful reason, therefore, she is not entitled to any maintenance, thus prays that the impugned order may be set aside. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the order of the Courts below are well merited which do not call for any interference by this Court. 4 / 4 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 7. Perusal of the documents would show that the Courts below have granted interim maintenance to the wife and two daughters to the tune of Rs.5000/- which in the considered opinion of this Court is just and proper. Since the submission has been made by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant No.3, who is a 92 years old lady and she is unable to walk and is bedridden, therefore, she may be exonerated from the criminal proceedings. Learned counsel for the respondents in this regard contended that she has no objection if the proceedings are quashed against applicant No.3 Smt. Anima Das. 8. In view of the above, applicant no.3 who is a 92 years old lady against her the criminal proceedings initiated in Criminal Appeal No.32/2023 are quashed. 9. With such observation, the instant criminal revision is disposed of. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. SD/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu