1 2025:CGHC:36473 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 964 of 2024 1. Smt. Samarin Bai Kumhar W/o Akali Ram (Father Narmada Prasad) Aged About 50 Years Occupation Nothing, R/o Dadesara, Tehsil Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 2. Kumari Sheela Chakradhari D/o Akali Ram Aged About 27 Years Occupation Student, R/o Dadesara Tehsil Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh Haal Mukam, Kumharpara, Raigarh Tehsil and District Raigarh Chhattisgarh --- Applicants versus Akali Ram Kumhar S/o Late Seetaram Kumhar Aged About 55 Years R/o Badesara, Tehsil Kurud, District – Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For Applicants : None. For Respondent : Mr. Krishnakant Prajapati, Advocate. Along with CRR No. 1294 of 2024 Akali Ram Kumhar S/o Late Sitaram Kumhar, Aged About 62 Years Occupation-Kumhargiri, R/o Village-Dadesara, P.S. and Tahsil- Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) --- Applicants Versus 1. Smt. Samarin Bai Kumhar W/o Akali Ram Kumhar (Father- Narmada Prasad), Aged About 50 Years R/o Dadesara, Tahsil-Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.), Haal Mukam Kumharpara, Raigarh, Tahsil and District-Raigarh (C.G.) 2. Ku. Sheela Chakradhari D/o Akali Ram, Aged About 27 Years Occupation-Student, R/o Dadesara, Tahsil-Kurud, District- Dhamtari PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.07.29 15:57:26 +0530 2 (C.G.), Haal Mukam Kumharpara, Raigarh, Tahsil and District- Raigarh (C.G.) --- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Krishnakant Prajapati, Advocate For Respondents : None. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28/07/2025 1. Since the aforesaid two criminal revisions have been filed against the same order, they are being decided of by this common order. 2. In the present case, an application for maintenance was filed on behalf of the wife, Smt. Samarin Bai Kumhar and daughter Ku. Sheela Chakradhari. The learned Family Court, Raigarh vide order dated 03.07.2024, granted a monthly maintenance amount of total ₹3,000/- to the wife, Smt. Samarin Bai Kumhar and rejected the application with respect to daughter Ku. Sheela Chakradhari. Being aggrieved by the said order, both parties preferred criminal revision petitions. The wife, Smt. Samarin Bai Kumhar and daughter Ku. Sheela Chakradhari, filed Criminal Revision No. 964/2024, contending that the amount awarded is inadequate, unjust, and does not meet the rising cost of living; hence, it deserves to be enhanced suitably. On the other hand, the husband, Akali Ram Kumhar, filed Criminal Revision No. 1294/2024 asserting that the amount awarded is excessive and beyond his financial capacity, and therefore, the same deserves to be reduced/set-aside. 3. Mr. KrishnaKant Prajaptai, learned counsel appearing for husband, namely, Akali Ram Kumhar, would submit that the impugned order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the learned Family Court, Raigarh, District – 3 Raigarh (C.G.), is contrary to law and the evidence on record, and therefore deserves to be set-aside. He further submits that the Family Court failed to appreciate that the wife left the matrimonial home in 1994 and has been residing separately from the husband at her parental house even since, without any sufficient cause. Therfore, as per the provision of Section 125(4) of the CrPC, the wife is not liable to be granted any maintenance as she is living separately without any sufficient cause. Therefore, the maintenance amount deserves to be set-aside/reduced suitably. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the husband and gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the husband, and from the perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, it transpires that after hearing all the statements of 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. 6. Accordingly, the instant criminal revisions being devoid of merits, are liable to be and are hereby dismissed. 7. A copy of this order as well as original record of this case be sent to learned Family Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti