1 2025:CGHC:27469 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1123 of 2023 1 - Ishvari Sahu W/o Shri Satyanarayan Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o Nand Kishore Agrawal, Housing Board Colony, Ashok Nagar Sarkanda, Quarter No. C/18, Bilaspur, Tehsil Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ku. Vineeta @ Anshi Sahu D/o Satyanarayan Sahu Aged About 5 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Ishwari Sahu, Aged About 28 Years, W/o Shri Satyanarayan Sahu, R/o Nand Kishore Agrawal, Housing Board Colony, Ashok Nagar Sarkanda, Quarter No. C/18, Bilaspur, Tehsil Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant(s) versus Satyanarayan Sahu S/o Shri Udayram Sahu Aged About 34 Years Occupation Deputy Engineer, Chhattisgarh Rural Road Development Agency Gariyaband, C/o Executive Engineer Chhattisgarh Rural Road Development Agency Project Implementation Unit No. 2, Near Collector House, Gariyaband, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-applicant(s) Along with CRR No. 17 of 2024 1 - Satyanarayan Sahu S/o Shri Udayram Sahu Aged About 34 Years Assistant Engineer, Chhattisgarh Rural Road Development Agency Gariyaband C/o Executive Engineer Chhattisgarh Rural Road Development Agency Project Implementation Unit Number-2 Near Collector Residence Gariyaband District Gariyaband (C.G.), Present RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Address - Satyanarayan Sahu S/o Shri Udayram Sahu, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Akaltara, Post - Akaltara, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) Versus 1 - Smt. Ishwari Sahu W/o Shri Satyanarayan Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o Nand Kishore Agrawal, Housing Board Colony, Ashol Nagar Sarkanda Quarter No. - C/18, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.). 2 - Ku. Vineeta @ Anshi Sahu D/o Shri Satyanarayan Sahu Aged About 5 Years Minor, Through Her Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Ishwari Sahu, R/ o Nand Kishore Agrawal, Housing Board Colony, Ashol Nagar Sarkanda Quarter No. - C/18, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Adv. in CRR No.1123/2023 For Non-applicant : Mr. Vikrant Pillay, Adv. in CRR No. 1123/2023 And For Applicant : Mr. Vikrant Pillay, Adv. in CRR No.17/2024 For Non-applicant : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Adv. in CRR No.17/2024 Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24 /0 6 /20 25 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. Ishwari Sahu and daughter Ku. Vineeta @ Anshi Sahu. The learned Family Court, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur vide order dated 22.09.2023, granted a monthly maintenance amount of total ₹10,000/- to the wife, Smt. Ishwari Sahu and 3 daughter Ku. Vineeta @ Anshi Sahu. Being aggrieved by the said order, both parties preferred criminal revision petitions. The wife, Smt. Ishwari Sahu and daughter Ku. Vineeta @ Anshi Sahu, filed Criminal Revision No. 1123/2023, 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, Satyanarayan Sahu, filed Criminal Revision No. 17/2024, asserting that the amount awarded is excessive and beyond his financial capacity, and therefore, the same deserves to be reduced/set-aside. 3. Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned counsel appearing for wife and daughter namely, Smt. Ishwari Sahu and Ku. Vineeta @ Anshi Sahu would submits that the order of learned Family Court is based on conjecture and surmises. She further submits that the wife has proved income of her husband is Rs. 70,000/- per month. However, the learned Family Court concerned partly allowed the application and awarded maintenance amount Rs. 10,000/- per month in favour of wife and daughter, ignoring the fact that the husband is earning person and he earns of about 70,000/- per month. The learned Family Court has passed maintenance amount is very lower side. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Family Court is illegal, improper and contrary to the fact and as such, amount of maintenance i.e. total Rs.10,000/- is shockingly low looking to the cost of living, standard of living, cost of price index, therefore, same be enhanced suitably. 4 4. Per contra, Mr. Vikrant Pillay, learned counsel appearing for husband Satyanarayan Sahu, would submit that the learned Family Court failed to appreciate that the husband is ready and willing to keep his wife with him, but she left the matrimonial house and living separately, without there being any reasonable cause. He further submits that the learned Family Court failed to appreciate that the wife has not adduced any evidence in respect of income of the husband. The learned Family Court has awarded disproportionate maintenance in favour of the wife. He further submits that his wife is doing stitching and tailoring work and from where she received sufficient amount and she is able to maintain herself. He also submits that the wife is an uncontrolled mind lady and she is living separately without any reasonable cause. Therefore, the maintenance amount deserves to be set-aside/reduced suitably. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 6. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that an application was filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. by the wife before the learned Family Court concerned for grant of maintenance and after appreciating the evidence and documents available on record, the learned Family Court passed the order dated 22.09.2023, whereby it was directed the husband to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month towards maintenance to wife and daughter and further ordered to bear Rs. 500/- for expenses of the proceeding. Being aggrieved by the said order, both parties preferred criminal 5 revision petitions. The wife, Smt. Ishwari Sahu and daughter Ku. Vineeta @ Anshi Sahu, filed Criminal Revision No. 1123/2023, 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, Satyanarayan Sahu, filed Criminal Revision No. 17/2024, asserting that the amount awarded is excessive and beyond his financial capacity, and therefore, the same deserves to be reduced/set-aside. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perusing the documents appended with revisions and finding recorded by learned Family Court while awarding the maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month to the wife. I am of the considered view that the learned Family Court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 8. For the foregoing reasons, both the revisions deserve to and are accordingly dismissed. 9. 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 Rahul Dewangan