1 2025:CGHC:24923 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1119 of 2016 Smt. Pushpa Kshatriya W/o Radhe Kshatriya S/o Krishna Bhusan Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Kundrouli, Thana Lalpur Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus Radhe Kshatriya S/o Ram Singh Thakur Aged About 42 Years R/o Kundarubadi Karbala Road, Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Krishna Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Krishna Kumar Dewangan, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. None appears for the private respondent. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the judgment dated 30.08.2016 passed by the learned Family Court, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 346/2015, whereby the learned Family Court, District – Bilaspur, has rejected the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant for grant of maintenance. Hence, the applicant preferred this Criminal Revision. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the marriage between the applicant and respondent has been solemnized on prior to 25 years back at Village Kundrouli by Hindu Rites, thereafter, both were residing at Bilaspur, out of wedlock 3 children born. After some time of marriage, the respondent threatened to applicant it is also alleged that the respondent used to beaten to the applicant after taking drink, it further falsely alleged that the applicant had illicit relationship with others, finally the respondent driven out to applicant and applicant reside with her parent house since 4 years. The applicant has not any source of income and fully dependent on parents. The applicant also pleaded that the respondent has sufficient source of income. He earns more than Rs. 50,000/- per month. The applicant filed application under Section 125 of CrPC before Family Court Bilaspur after receipt of notice the respondent filed reply reveals the all allegations, thereafter, after both the parties lead evidence, after marshaled of evidence, of parties the learned Family Court, Bilaspur dismissed the application on the ground that the applicant left the house of respondent without sufficient reason. Hence, this revision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the order passed by learned Family Court is illegal and contrary to facts and circumstances of the case. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court not appreciated the evidence lead by the applicant and her witness, the applicant categorically pleaded and stated in her deposition that the respondent committed cruelty by demanding the dowry and threatened to the applicant, the respondent driven out to applicant. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court committed error to appreciate the evidence of the respondent, the respondent never made any effort to keep the applicant. The learned Family Court appreciate the evidence of Rajendra (respondent deposition No.2) and reject the 3 application but cross examination of said witness he himself admitted the dispute about land between applicant. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court ought to have seen that in an application under Section 125 of the CrPC, the Court has to examine whether the respondents have reasonable ground for getting maintenance amount. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, and from the perusal of the judgments/orders of the trial Court as well as the revisional Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, it is clear that after considering all the materials and after applying mind the learned Family Court, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) has passed the impugned judgment and order dated 30.08.2016 in Misc. Criminal Case No. 346/2015, whereby the learned Family Court, District – Bilaspur, has rejected the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant for grant of maintenance, and there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same. 7. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 8. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order as well as the original records to the concerned trial Court within a week from today for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar