1 2025:CGHC:34626 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 958 of 2022 Smt. Sudha Banjare W/o Of Shri Lalchand Banjare Aged About 31 Years R/o Near Vishvadeep School, Gurughashidas Ward, Kasaridih, Durg Ward No. 44, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus Lalchand Banjare S/o Late Chintaram Banjare Aged About 35 Years R/o Newai Bhatha, Yadav Basti, Bhilai Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. Office Address - Customer Assistant, State Bank Of India, Branch - Gandai, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Punit Ruparel, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 10.08.2022 passed by the learned Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 530/2017, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant, and directed the respondent that he has to pay Rs. 7,000/- per month to the applicant as maintenance. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the applicant filed an application RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 under Section 125 of CrPC for grant of maintenance before the learned Family Court Durg and claimed Rs.30,000/- per months as a maintenance. The applicant and the respondent solemnized their marriage on 21.06.2014 according to Hindu customs and rites. Just after the marriage, the respondent and his family taunting upon the applicant for bringing less dowry and the husband used to beaten her, thereafter the husband refused to live with respondent and not performed the marital life and refused to cohabit with her and also taunting that she is not more than med, the applicant wants to live with the respondent in all conditions hence she performed her matrimonial duties towards family without complaining to anyone but the husband used to quarrel and beaten her and threatened to thrown out from the house, thereafter the family meeting was held he promise that he will kept the applicant in good condition, but after some days he again done the same thing. The applicant also stated that the respondent/husband left her in October, 2016 in her parents house forcefully when the parents of the applicant went to the house of respondent for leaving the applicant to her matrimonial house he was not ready after so many requests he is ready to keep but after some days he started quarrel the with again applicant and thrown her outside the house. Being harassed by the husband and his family, the applicant made complaint to the Mahila Thana, Durg and Sakhi Center, Durg whereas the counseling was held, in counseling the respondent clearly stated that he is not kept the applicant with him, the applicant is less educated lady and at present she is not working anywhere, further she is not able to perform any job due to less education, contrarily the as Customer respondent is working Assistant in State Bank of India, Branch Gandai, District Rajnandgaon and earning sum of Rs. 55,000/- per month and except that he has a 2.5 acre 3 agricultural land, plots and house out of which he is earning Rs. 60,000- 70,000/-. 4. The respondent has denied the allegations levelled against him in the application. After perusing the documents and hearing the submissions of the parties, and the learned Family Court partly allowed the application filed by the applicant and granted maintenance of Rs. 7,000/- to the applicant as maintenance. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the impugned order is arbitrary and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. It is further submitted that the respondent s working Assistant in State Bank of India, Branch Gandai, District Rajnandgaon and earning sum of Rs. 55,000/- per month and except that he has a 2.5 acre agricultural land, plots and house out of which he is earning Rs. 60,000-70,000/-, even that the learned Family Court has ignoring this fact and granted only 7,000/- per month as maintenance and hence, the maintenance amount is liable to be enhanced. Therefore, the order of the Family Court is liable to be modified. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. 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 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. 4 8. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 9. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar