1 2025:CGHC:23480 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 665 of 2025 1 - Smt. Susmita Deb W/o Phalguni Deb Aged About 44 Years R/o 1689/8, Sector - 2, Jhanda Chowk, Shivanand Nagar, P.S. Khamtarai, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Phalguni Deb S/o Deepak Deb Aged About 44 Years Permanent R/o Flat No. 2- B, Sudha Apartment, 197 J.N. Bose Road, Subhas Gram Near Railway Gate, Post - Kodalia, P.S. Sonarpur Kolkata (W.B.) Pin Code 700146. Also At - Overlook At Bear Creek, 800 E Ash Lane, Apartment 2123, Euless Texas (U.S.) Zip Code 76039- 4700 ... Respondent For the Petitioner : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Advocate For the Respondent : None (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 12/06/2025 2 1. This revision has been filed against the order dated 20.03.2025 passed by the learned 1st Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur in MJC No.229 of 2020 whereby the application filed by the wife for grant of interim maintenance during pendency of the petition filed u/s 125 of CrPC has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that that the trial Court has erred in rejecting the application seeking interim maintenance on the ground that the case was fixed for non-applicant’s evidence and it is at the verge of final disposal. He submits that there is no immediate possibility of disposal of trial and prays for grant of interim maintenance. 3. The learned trial Court has noted the fact that the applicant was working in Pune and as per her application itself, her monthly income is Rs.82,000/- and she demanded maintenance amount for treatment and other expenses and further the applicant’s evidence has been completed and the case is at the stage of non-applicant’s evidence and thus the case was fixed for non-applicant’s evidence on 26.09.2023. The learned trial Court has also recorded the facts that applicant is the married wife of the non-applicant and the application filed by her seeking interim maintenance had been rejected by the Court and earlier she was ordered to be given maintenance and compensation in case of domestic violence, but later it was cancelled on 09.11.2023. Against the said order, CRR No.455 of 2024 was filed by her in which High Court has passed the order dated 13.02.2025 and upheld the order dated 09.11.2023. Thus noting the facts, the trial Court has denied the possibility of time being taken in the final disposal of the 3 case as contended by the applicant and held that it does not appear appropriate to entertain application for interim maintenance filed by her and accordingly rejected the application. 4. After perusal of the trial Court order, I am of the opinion that the reasons assigned by the trial Court while rejecting the application filed by the applicant for interim maintenance, cannot be said to be unsustained. Accordingly, this revision petition is rejected. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the disposal of the case as early as possible without being influenced by the remarks/observations made in this Order. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao