1 2025:CGHC:31289 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 486 of 2021 1. Smt. Varsha Deshmukh W/o Tejram Deshmukh Aged About 32 Years R/o 5- Building, Quarter No. H-2/b-38, Street No. 6, Tehsil and District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, 2. Ku. Yana Deshmukh D/o Tejram Deshmukh Aged About 9 Years Applicant No. 2 Is Minor, Represented Through By Natural Guardian Mother ( Applicant No. 1), R/o 5- Building, Quarter No. H-2/b-38, Street No. 6, Tehsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, 3. Purv Deshmukh S/o Tejram Deshmukh Aged About 5 Years Applicant No. 3 Is Minor, Represented Through By Natural Guardian Mother ( Applicant No. 1), R/o 5- Building, Quarter No. H-2/b-38, Street No. 6, Tehsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, ... Applicants versus Tejram Deshmukh S/o Khorbahra Ram Deshmukh Aged About 38 Years R/o Shyam Nagar, Risali, Ward No. 61, Near Higher Secondary School, Risali Village, P.S.-Newai, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent(s) For Applicants : Mr. Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.07.09 13:45:17 +0530 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.07.2025 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicants being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 18.03.2021 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No.1193/2018, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application of the applicants filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and it is directed to the respondent/husband that he pay of Rs. 6,000/- per month to the applicant No.1/wife and Rs. 4,000/- to the applicant No.2/daughter and Rs. 2,000/- per month to applicant No.3/son, (total Rs. 12,000/-) as maintenance amount from the date of order. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the applicants filed a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC, seeking maintenance of ₹20,000 per month for applicant No. 1 and applicants No. 2 and applicants No. 3, stating that the applicant No. 1 got married to the respondent on 11.05.2006, as per Hindu customs and rituals. The couple had two children, and after the marriage, the respondent and his family members allegedly harassed the applicant for various reasons, including the gifts she brought and her character. On 12.01.2018, the respondent husband allegedly beat the applicant after drinking alcohol, causing her injuries and deteriorating her health. When the applicant's parents came to their aid, the respondent allegedly beat the applicant in front of them, forcing her to leave the matrimonial home with her children. The applicant claimed that she was unable to maintain herself and her children, depending on her parents, and sought maintenance from the respondent, who she alleged was earning more than ₹90,000 per month as an Assistant Loco Pilot in the 3 Railways and had agricultural land. The respondent denied these allegations, stating that the applicant willfully left the matrimonial home and that he had other liabilities, making him not liable to pay maintenance. The trial court partly allowed the application, granting maintenance to the applicants. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the judgment passed by the learned Family Court is contrary to the material available on record and is liable to be enhanced. The learned Family Court failed to appreciate that the respondent and his family members had been ill-treating and harassing applicant No. 1 since their marriage. The Family Court erred in assessing the respondent's income, despite evidence showing that he is an Assistant Loco Pilot in the Railways, earning over ₹90,000 per month, with no other liabilities except for the applicants. The Family Court also failed to consider that the respondent and his parents made no effort to take the applicant back into their home. Furthermore, the Court did not adequately consider the applicants' needs, particularly given that the children were studying in school, and granted a meager amount towards maintenance. The Court gravely erred in rejecting the application for a higher grant of maintenance despite the respondent's stable government job and substantial income. The applicant, being the legally wedded wife, is entitled to maintain a living standard commensurate with that of the respondent. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set-aside. 4. 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 18.03.2021 passed by the learned Additional Prinicpal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal 4 Case No. 1193/2018, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicants, and ordered the respondent/husband that he has to pay the allowance for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per month to the applicant No.1/wife and Rs. 4,000/- to the applicant No.2/daughter and Rs. 2,000/- per month to applicant No.3/son, (total Rs. 12,000/-), and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same, therefore, the instant revision is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, and from the perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, it transpires that after hearing all the statements of the witnesses and perusing the evidence available on record, and considering the conditions of the applicants, 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. 7. Accordingly, the present revision being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 8. Let a copy of this order as well as original record of this case be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti