1 2025:CGHC:27699 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 692 of 2019 Namrata Verma W/o Pikesh Verma Aged About 26 Years R/o F/o Beniram Verma, Village- Kanteli, Tahsil And District- Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus Pikesh Verma S/o Prakashchand Verma Aged About 34 Years R/o Village- Bhaisamuda, Police Station- Dharseeva, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Aman Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Shubham Thakur, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 25.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Aman Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Shubham Thakur, learned counsel for the private respondent. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 02.05.2019 passed by the learned Family Court, Bemetara, District – Bemetara (C.G.) in Criminal MJC No. 251/2018, whereby the learned Family Court, Bemetara, District – Bemetara, dismissed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the applicant and the respondent RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 tied knots on 28.04.2013, whereby out of their wedlock, a male child was born namely Yash Verma, meanwhile the respondent called his sibling (brother) who was unwaged, the respondent acknowledged his brother that he would get a job in Bilaspur, where the parties were residing, after the advent of the respondent's brother namely Virendra Verma, some conflicts arosed between the applicant and the respondent, the respondent's brother would incite the respondent about the applicant's character alleging that his wife was having an affair with his neighbour namely Aman Suryavanshi. After which the respondent, gobbling of alcohol, would molest and implement cruelty on the applicant both physically and mentally, and the applicant only because of her son, endured the molestation and cruelty of the respondent, and on 02.04.2016, the respondent propelled the applicant from her matrimonial house. After the incident the applicant's parents called the respondent to construe about their matrimonial life, but no heed was paid by the respondent, in fact the respondent filed an application under Section 13 (1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act for the decree of divorce from the applicant in the Leaned Family Court, Raipur (C.G.). The applicant also filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C for maintenance from the respondent, on 30.10.2018, including the application for interim maintenance before the learned Family court, Bemetara. After taking evidence of the parties, the learned Family Court, Bemetara without undeniable evidence of the parties, dismissed the application of the applicant under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that there is no evident testimony on the part of the respondent, as the respondent is only concealing the fallacy on his part, after gobbling of alcohol the respondent used to torture and implement cruelty on the applicant, 3 whereby the applicant as being a homemaker used to visit their neighbours house, because there were mostly women in that house, which has been reasserted by the respondent and his brother as well, that in their neighbours house, there were mostly women. The respondent in his deposition has stated that the applicant is not a working women and every women needs some income for maintaining herself. Therefore, the order of the learned Family Court is liable to be quashed. 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 02.05.2019 passed by the learned Family Court, Bemetara, District – Bemetara (C.G.) in Criminal MJC No. 251/2018, whereby the learned Family Court, Bemetara, District – Bemetara, dismissed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant, and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same, 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 order of the Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, it transpires that after hearing all the statements of the witnesses and perusing the evidence available on record, the learned Family Court has passed the impugned order, and there is no any illegality and infirmity while passing the same which requires interference by this Court. 4 8. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 9. Registrar (Judicial) of this Court is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order as well as the original records to the concerned trial Court within a week for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar