1 2025:CGHC:28195 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 769 of 2025 Smt. Santoshi Rajput W/o Shri Munna (Manrakhan) Rajput Aged About 32 Years Occupation Housewife Pesent R/o Station Para, Ward No. 12, Thana City Kotwali Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Munna (Manrakhan) Rajput S/o Dhur Singh Rajput Aged About 34 Years Occupation Sarkari Godan Dongargarh Me Hamal R/o Village Kariyatola, Thana And Tahsil Dongargaon District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 26.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 22.04.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Rajnandgaon, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in MJC No. 03/2014, whereby the learned Family Court, Rajnandgaon, District – Rajnandgaon, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant and directed the respondent that he has to pay Rs. 1,500/- per month to the applicant as maintenance. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The prosecution story in brief is that an application under Section 125 of CrPC for grant of maintenance was filed by the applicant stating that the marriage of the applicant and respondent was solemnized on 03.05.2023 as per Hindu Rituals. She further stated that after some time the respondent and his family members assaulted her and also demanded to bring money. The applicant is living separately with her parents from the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent has filed the reply to the applicant filed by the applicant before learned Family Court and denied all allegations. Vide order dated 22.04.2025 the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant and awarded maintenance amount of Rs. 1,500/- per month to the applicant. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the Family Court has failed to see that the respondent has tortured the applicant for demand of money, and the respondent is having much resource of income of the respondent and passed the order of less amount which is liable to be enhanced. The applicant is house wife and she is having no source of income and she is not qualified therefore the amount which has been passed by the learned Family Court is to be enhanced. Therefore, the impugned order is contrary to the facts, and the same is liable to be set-aside. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 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 3 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. 7. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 8. Registrar (Judicial) of this Court is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar