1 2025:CGHC:33860 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 866 of 2025 Ku. Ananya Yadav D/o Chandrabhan Yadav Aged About 12 Years Through Her Natural Guardian Mother Manju Yadu S/o Late Shri Ramkumar Yadav, R/o Melapara, Chantidih, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus Chandrabhan Yadu S/o Lakhanlal Yadu Aged About 30 Years Present Address - Dondi Lohara, P.S. Lohara District- Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Virendra Singh, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17 /07/2025 1. The applicant has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 08.05.2025 passed by the 1st Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bilaspur (C.G.) in M.J.C. No. 1122/2019, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application of the applicant and granted maintenance of Rs.600/- per month. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this revision are that the marriage between the applicant’s mother and respondent was solemnized on 12.05.2013 and out their wedlock the present applicant was born and after that due to some minor dispute, the respondent left taking care of the applicant. In the year 2014 when the present applicant was born, the respondent took no care of her and due to this ill treatment done by the respondent, the applicant called out the social meeting, in which no fruitfull decision was taken in favour of the applicant the applicant mother has taken divorce through mutual consent before the society. 3. The respondent is the father of the applicant and the applicant has filed an application for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Family Court and the learned Family Court after examination of the witnesses passed the order of maintenance of Rs. 600/- from the date of order. The applicant has preferred this revision of enhancement in the maintenance amount. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order passed by the learned Family Court in against the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Further, the learned Family Court was not justified in holding that the maintenance amount of Rs. 600/- per month to the applicant would be a fair amount for the day to day needs of the applicant. The applicant was a 5 years old girl when the maintenance proceedings started and now, she is 12 years old 3 young girl and has her expense for her school education and stationeries and other similar heads, which has not been considered by the learned Family Court. The mere amount of Rs. 600/- would not aid the applicant to overcome the needs in her daily routine. The learned Family Court should have considered the standard of living of a normal girl child in the prevailing place where the applicant resides to ascertain the amount of maintenance for the applicant. In the amount granted by the learned Family Court, the applicant’s mother is not able to fulfill her needs. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with criminal revision. 6. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the Family Court has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant observing that applicant is the daughter of respondent and such it is the responsibility of the respondent to maintain her and in view of the same, granted maintenance of Rs.600/- per month, observing the income, social and economic status of both the parties and current price index, which cannot be said to be on lower side. 7. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perusing the impugned order and the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, I am of the view that the 4 Family Court has not committed any illegality or infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil