1 2025:CGHC:41307 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 624 of 2024 1 - Smt. Sumitra Poyam W/o Shri Shyambabu Poyam Aged About 27 Years R/o R.E.S. Colony Bacheli, Thana Bacheli, Tahsil Bade Bacheli, District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh 2 - Simmy Poyam D/o Shri Shyambabu Poyam Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Sumitra Poyam, R/o R.E.S. Colony Bacheli, Thana Bacheli, Tahsil Bade Bacheli, District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus Shri Shyambabu Poyam S/o Late Narsu Yalam Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 1, Channupara Bacheli, Thana Bacheli, Tahsil Bade Bacheli, District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 01.03.2024 passed by the learned Family Court, District – South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 72/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 by the applicants, and directed the applicant that he has to pay Rs. 2,500/- per month to the applicant No.2 as maintenance. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the respondent is the husband of applicant No. 1 and father of applicant No.2. The Marriage of applicant No.1 with respondent was solemnized on August 2014 in accordance to Hindu rites and rituals at village Bacheli, Thana & Tahsil Bacheli, District South Bastar Dantewada, C.G. Out of their wedlock they have one daughter i.e. applicant No.2 who born on 12/10/2016. Both the applicants and respondent belongs to Hindu Community and are govern by Mitakshara branch. The applicant No.1 has filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC with the pleading that the applicant No.2 is residing with applicant No.1, respondent is torturing the applicant suspecting her character and alleged that she is living in adultery. She further submits that respondent burn her entire cloths on 07/02/2023 and after assaulting her and her daughter kicked them out of his house, thus she went in the house of her mother at R.E.S Colony Bacheli and took shelter. Applicant also lodged F.I.R. regarding alleged incident at Police Station Bacheli on 03/03/2023 but Police did not took cognizance and directed to go in the Court. Applicant further pleaded that respondent is willing to marry some another girl therefore his behavior towards her and daughter changed. Now she is struggling for bread and butter as such respondent is not giving any financial support to maintain her and her daughter. The applicant is a house wife and applicant No.2 is a student of Class-I studying in Kendriya Vidyalaya Bacheli and she did not have any source of income to maintain herself and her daughter. The respondent is working in the post of Driver with monthly income of Rs 30,000/- per month. Therefore Rs. 20,000/- per month maintenance amount has been prayed for applicant No.1 and expense of applicant No.2, school fee etc 3 as per present status of the respondent. 4. The learned Family Court found that the applicant No.1 has not proved her case and the learned Family Court partially allowed the application and granted maintenance of Rs. 2,500/- per month in favor of applicant No. 2 and not for applicant No. 1 and thereby the learned Family Court passed impugned order. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the impugned order is arbitrary and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. The learned Family Court Judge completely ignored the fact that the applicant has no source of income and the respondent is working in the post of Driver with monthly income of Rs 30,000/- per month, and he has sufficient source of income to maintain both the applicants. Therefore, the order of the Family Court is liable to be modified. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 8. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 4 9. Let a certified copy of this order as well as the original records be transmitted to the concerned trial Court within a week for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar