1 2025:CGHC:27084 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 100 of 2024 Kunal Bandi S/o Late P.D. Bandi Aged About 33 Years R/o Green City Secl, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus Smt. Megha Singh Thakur W/o Kunal Bandi, Aged About 28 Years R/o Basant Vihar Colony B-131 Sarkanda Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh Presently At Mahasamund Tehsil And, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate, holding brief of Ms. Supriya Upasane, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Tarendra Kumar Jha, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 23.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate, holding brief of Ms. Supriya Upasane, learned counsel the applicant. Also heard Mr. Tarendra Kumar Jha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the impugned order dated 20.03.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in MCC No. 136/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur, allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the respondent for grant of maintenance and ordered the applicant/husband that he has to pay the allowance for RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 maintenance at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per month to respondent/wife. 3. The facts, in brief, is that the respondent filed an application under Section 125(1) of the CrPC before the learned Family Court seeking maintenance from an applicant who is the husband of respondent No.1. The marriage was solemnized between the present applicant and respondent on 26.04.2015 at Village Pandha, Tehsil - Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar (C.G.) according to Hindu rites and rituals. The respondent has on 25.07.2023 lodged the complaint against the applicants for the demand of dowry and assault her. The Police has registered the FIR bearing No. 92/23 against the applicants for the offences punishable under Section 498-A and 34 of the IPC. The respondent/wife had already having illicit, extra marital affairs with several Men and on Mid-Night around 1.AM on 06/08/2022 the complainant stared creating Havoc and Nuisance in the society compound by coming out naked in the public premises, thereafter the Security Head of S.E.C.L Society was being informed that the respondent started shouting that applicant had left her, thereafter, Police Van, from emergency services of 112 had come, in that van one Police officer along with the applicant came and then the Security Head asked the applicant to take the respondent inside the house. After that the respondent after wearing some clothes came back in the society compound and started misbehaving with the Police officer. After a lot of discussions the respondent was convinced to go home, further around 3:45 am the Security Head of S.E.C.L had also gone. Applicant along with 3 his family members are harassing her since the time of marriage. However, she has not filed any single complaint against the applicant during the period of two years, the point to be observed is that during 2 years the respondent hasn't filed any complaint and had filed the false and fabricated complaint after she was caught with some other man. The respondent is running a luxurious beauty center at Raipur and is capable of earning and maintaining her high- class living status. The respondent had manytimes beaten and injured the old aged parents of the applicant and had forced the applicant to reside separately with her parents, the mother of applicant had registered the FIR for the same. The respondent had filed false and frivolous criminal cases against the applicant and his family members with the motive to extract money from the appellant. During the pendency of the trial the learned Family Court has passed an order for grant of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- for three months and thereafter Rs. 20,000/- per month thereafter to the respondent on the ground that the applicant has responsibility towards the wife and the reasons behind the husband and wife living separately shall be considered upon during trial as it is a matter of evidence. The learned Family Court has passed an order without considering the facts and circumstances and only on the ground that the applicant has responsibility and attempts at reconciliation had failed and the factum of the reasons behind separation shall be considered upon during the trial on basis of merits of the matter. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the 4 impugned order dated 20.03.2023 by which the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur, has allowed the application under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the respondent/wife and the same was stated to be an ex-parte order which is challenged in the present revision. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that an application under Section 126 CrPC was moved by the applicant and the matter has been revoked and reopened, further the proceedings under Section 125 of CrPC is going on and the next date fixed is 02.08.2025. It is further submitted that the Family Court has failed to consider the fact that the respondent had filed false and frivolous criminal cases against the applicant and his family members with the motive to extract money from the applicant. Therefore, the impugned order of the learned Family is liable to be set-aside. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the impugned judgment and order dated 20.03.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in MCC No. 136/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur, allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the respondent for grant of maintenance and ordered the applicant/husband that he has to pay the allowance for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per month to respondent/wife, and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same, therefore, the instant revision filed by the applicant/complainant is devoid of merits and is liable to 5 be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and from the perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the impugned order dated 20.03.2023 by which the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur, has allowed the application under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the respondent/wife and the same was stated to be an ex-parte order which is challenged in the present revision, It has been brought to the notice of this Court that an application under Section 126 CrPC was moved by the applicant and the matter has been revoked and reopened, furthermore, the proceedings under Section 125 of CrPC is going on and the next date fixed is 02.08.2025. 8. In view of the same, the present criminal revision is hereby rejected. 9. 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