1 2025:CGHC:38861 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 962 of 2025 Shivam Nirmalkar S/o Shri Bedaram Nirmalkar Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Mendra, P.S. Sakri, Tehsil Sakri, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Deepika Nirmalkar W/o Shivam Nirmalkar Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Mendra, Police Station Sakri, Presently R/o Deorikhurd, Tehsil Bilha, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Minor Ujjwal Nirmalkar Aged About 3 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Deepika Nirmalkar, R/o Village Mendra, Police Station Sakri, Presently R/o Deorikhurd, Tehsil Bilha, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Pratik Vishwakarma, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. Pratik Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the judgment dated 18.01.2024 passed by the learned Family Court, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) in MJC No. 302/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, allowed the application for grant of interim maintenance, and ordered the applicant/husband that he has to pay the interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month to the respondent No.1 and Rs. 500/- per month to the respondent No.2. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The facts, in brief, is that the present applicant was married to respondent No. 1 on 27.07.2020 at Deorikhurd, Torwa, District Bilaspur, according to Hindu rites and customs. Out of the said lawful wedlock, a male child, respondent No. 2, was born, who is currently residing with respondent No. 1 at her parental home in Deorikhurd. After the marriage, the applicant and the respondent No. 1 lived together as husband and wife at the applicant's residence in Village Mendra. However, within a short span of time, frequent quarrels started arising between the parties due to the obstinate and non-cooperative behaviour of respondent No. 1. Despite best efforts made by the applicant and his family members to maintain harmony in the matrimonial life, the respondent No. 1 would often pick up arguments and threaten to leave the matrimonial home. On or about 25.03.2023, after altercation, respondent No. 1 voluntarily left the a domestic matrimonial home along with her minor child, jewellery, clothes and personal belongings. The applicant and his family members tried to persuade her to return, but she refused and instead lodged a false and concocted complaint at the Sakri Police Station on 27.03.2023, levelling vague and baseless allegations of physical and mental harassment. Thereafter, the applicant, in an effort to reconcile the matrimonial relationship, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights before the appropriate Court. However, despite the pendency of the said case and several requests made by the applicant, respondent No. 1 refused to rejoin the company of the applicant and continues to reside at her parental home. Subsequently, respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC before the Hon'ble Family Court, Bilaspur, claiming interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month for herself and the minor child, alleging cruelty and desertion by the applicant and 3 further claiming that the applicant has substantial income from agricultural land and plaster-of-Paris designing work. 4. The applicant herein has filed the reply to the said application and has denied the averments raised by the respondent. The learned Family Court has recorded the statement of the parties. The witnesses were examined before the learned Family Court including the applicant and the respondent. The learned Family Court by passing the impugned order, has allowed the application filed by the respondents for grant of interim maintenance and directed the applicant to pay the interim maintenance to the tune of Rs. 1,000/- per month to the respondent No.1 and Rs. 500/- per month to the respondent No.2. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, is contrary to the facts and evidence available on record. It is further submitted that the respondent No.1 is voluntarily residing separately from the applicant without any sufficient reason, thus, as per Section 125(4) of CrPC, she is not liable to be granted any interim maintenance from her husband. Therefore, the impugned order is bad in law, perverse and erroneous, and the same it is liable to be set-aside/quashed. 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 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 awarded interim 4 maintenance to the respondents, and there is no any illegality and infirmity while passing the same which requires interference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby rejected. 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