1 2025:CGHC:41243 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 919 of 2024 Chandra Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Puniram Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Village- Pedri, Post Office And Police Station- Nawagarh, (Wrongly Mentioned As Village- Dharashiv Pendri, Police Station- Pamgarh, District- Janjgir-Champa, C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus Smt. Sunita Sahu W/o Shri Chandra Kumar Sahu, D/o Shri Ramnarayan Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o Rumgara, Police Station- Balco Nagar, Korba, District- Korba, C.G. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Paras Mani Shrivas, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. S.P. Sannat, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. Paras Mani Shrivas, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. S.P. Sannat, learned counsel for the Non-applicant. 2. By way of this revision, the applicant has prayed for following relief: “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this Criminal Revision and quash /set-aside the order dated 05/07/2024 passed by Family Court Korba, District-Korba (C.G.) in Criminal M. J. C. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 No. 23/2021, in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the non-applicant is married wife of the applicant, their marriage was solemnized on 23/05/2019 as per Hindu Rites and Customs, after solemnizing the marriage ceremony, non-applicant gone to the applicant's house and started to enjoy their married life. After spending few times peacefully of their married life, non-applicant has started to quarrel with applicant as well as his family members thereafter left the applicant's house and started living at her parental house, meanwhile applicant has several times trying to bring her but she nothing agree to return back in the applicant’s house. Thereafter in the year 2021, the non- applicant has filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Family Court concerned for grant of maintenance and stating that in her application therein that she is married wife of the applicant, their marriage was solemnized in the year 2019 as per Hindu Rites and Customs, after at the solemnizing the marriage ceremony she came applicant's house and started to enjoy their married life and after spending few day's peacefully of their married life, her husband as well as his family members have tortured to her for demand of dowery, then she left the applicant's house and started to live at her parental house. Her husband is working as Driver and earned heavy money, he has also more agricultural land, tractor's as well as bolero behicle whereas he earned heavy money but he did not take care to her then she is living very difficult life and facing financial crises. 3 4. After hearing the non-applicant's case, learned Family was issued notice to the applicant and after service of the notice, applicant present before the learned Family Court meanwhile filed his reply, denied the entire allegations of non-applicant and disclosed the fact's that the non-applicant left the applicant's house without any reason and now she is living with her lover then not entitled to get any maintenance amount from the applicant. During the course of further proceedings/examination of witness, applicant could not present before the learned Family Court due to non communication of his local counsel meanwhile he declared ex-party thereafter non- applicant’s case has been heard expertly by learned Family Court. Thereafter learned Family Court after taking evidence and considering the overall circumstances, decided the matter and passed the impugned order dated 05.07.2024 (ex-parte), whereby the applicant was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3000/- per month to the non-applicant/wife as maintenance and further ordered to bear Rs. 1000/- for litigation expenses. Hence this revision petition. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned Family Court has passed the order of maintenance without seeing the facts and circumstances of the case, only on the pleadings of the non- applicant. The applicant has always agreed to live with non- applicant but she herself left the applicant’s house without any proper reason and started living at her parental house, when the applicant come to bring her then parents of the non-applicant have started quarrel with him. Therefore, non-applicant has nothing entitled to get any amount for maintenance from the applicant and 4 therefore order passed by learned Family Court is liable to be quashed/set- aside. He further submits that after spending few times peacefully of their married life, non-applicant has started to quarrel with applicant as well as his family members meanwhile left the applicant's house and started living at her parental house meanwhile petitioner has several times trying to bring her but she did not agree to return back in the applicant’s house meanwhile filed a case before the learned J.M.F.C. Korba under Section 23 of Domestic Violence Act, whereas an interim order has been passed on 03/04/2024 in favor of the non-applicant and applicant was directed to pay rupees 2000/- per month as an interim maintenance. He further submits that the learned Family Court has failed to see that the non-applicant is living separately from the applicant without any proper reason and she made false allegation against the applicant about demand of dowry. Therefore, the learned Family Court has passed the maintenance amount in higher side without considering the evidence of monthly income of the applicant. Therefore, the same is liable to be set-aside. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the non-applicant opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the Family Court concerned after considering all the documents and evidence adduced by the parties has passed the order, in which no interference is called for. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with revision. 5 8. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that learned Family Court has held that the non-applicant has succeeded in proving her application. Therefore, keeping in view the social status of both the parties, monthly income of the applicant and other expenses, the Family Court has granted Rs.3000/- per month to the non-applicant as maintenance, which cannot be said to be shockingly on higher side. 9. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, perusing the documents appended with revision and finding recorded by learned Family Court while awarding the maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month to the non-applicant, I am of the considered view that learned Family Court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 10. Accordingly, the revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the concerned Family Court for necessary information and follow up action. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal