1 2025:CGHC:27747 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 758 of 2025 1 - Mehul Sharma S/o Jai Prakash Sharma Aged About 33 Years R/o D.R.M. Office (Railway) Traffic and Signals Bhopal Madhya Pradesh ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Priya Sharma W/o Mehul Sharma Aged About 30 Years R/o J- 622 Janta Colony Ekta Nagar Chowki Gudhiyari Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Krishna Sharma S/o Mehul Sharma Aged About 2 1/2 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Namely Smt. Priya Sharma R/o J- 622 Janta Colony Ekta Nagar Chowki Gudhiyari Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate For Respondents : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 25.06.2025 1. Heard. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the impugned order dated 14.05.2025 passed by the learned Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Misc. Cri. Case No.1347/2023, whereby the applicant for grant of VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA 2 interim maintenance has been partly allowed and amount of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- towards respondent No.1 and Rs.3,000/- towards respondent No.2 has been granted. 3. The facts, in brief, is that the respondent and applicant were married to each other on 22.01.2020 where all the rights and rituals were performed under the Hindu tradition and customs. After the wedlock their son was born in the years 2021. It was averred that, soon after marriage the family members of applicant started harassing respondent No.1 for bringing less dowry and further they demanded to bring more cash to purchase house at Jabalpur (M.P.). The learned Family Court, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Misc. Cri. Case No.1347/2023, whereby the applicant for grant of interim maintenance has been partly allowed and amount of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- towards respondent No.1 and Rs.3,000/- towards respondent No.2 has been granted. Hence, this revision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husband of the respondent, and interim order passed by the learned family Court, applicant is directed to pay the amount of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- to respondent No.1 and Rs.3,000/- towards respondent No.2. He further submits that respondent No.1 is earning Rs.22,000/- and she is capable enough to maintain herself. He also submits that learned family Court has failed to appreciate that applicant has old parents to take care and he has to further bear expenses of them and 3 applicant No.1 has left her matrimonial house on her own will therefore, she is not entitled for any amount of maintenance. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the non-applicants opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the impugned order dated 14.05.2025 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Misc. Cri. Case No.1347/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur, directed the applicant amount of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- towards respondent No.1 and Rs.3,000/- towards respondent No.2 has been granted and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the impugned order, 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 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 orders of the Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, and the matter is still pending before the learned Family Court concerned, thus, it is clear that after considering all the materials and after applying mind the learned Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) has passed the impugned order dated 14.05.2025 in 4 Misc. Cri. Case No.1347/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur, directed the applicant to pay amount of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- towards respondent No.1 and Rs.3,000/- towards respondent No.2 has been granted, and there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same. 8. Accordingly, the prayer made to quash the impugned order is refused. 9. However, the present revision is disposed of with the direction that the concerned Family Court is at liberty to conclude the proceedings under Section 125 of CrPC, preferably within a period of three months, if there is no any legal impediment. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali