1 2025:CGHC:27222 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 331 of 2017 Ashwani Kumar Pathari S/o Lakhan Lal Pathari, Aged About 36 Years R/o Bhartiya Nagar, Street No. 3, Bilaspur, Police Station Civil Line, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Yogeshwari Pathari W/o Ashwani Kumar Pathari, Aged About 33 Years D/o P. R. Lahari, R/o Street No. 3, Bajrang Nagar, Near Community Building, Gogaon, Police Station Gudhiyari Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh 2 - Sanidhya, S/o Ashwani Kumar Pathari, Aged About 8 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Yugeshwari Pathari, R/o Street No. 3 Bajrang Nagar, Near Community Building, Gogaon Police Station Gudhiyari Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicants : None present Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. None present for the non-applicants. 2. By way of this revision, the applicant has prayed for following relief: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the revision and set aside the order dated 27.02.2017 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Court Raipur District-Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal M.J.C. No. 104/2014 in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the the applicant is the husband of respondent No.1 and the respondent No.1 has been married with applicant on 23.02.2008 at Gogaon, Raipur and out of their wedlock son the respondent No.2 namely Sanidhya born on 23.09.2008. As per allegation made by the respondent No.1 in her application under Section 125 of Cr. P.C. that the respondent No.1 after few months of marriage was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the applicant in her in-laws house at Bhartiya Nagar, Bilaspur, the respondent No.1 came to conclusion that the reason behind harassment was demand of dowry. The respondent No.1 was oftenly beaten by applicant and her in laws are supported the cruel act of the applicant. The respondent No.1 was forced to leave the in-laws house on 25.09.2013 thereafter, the respondent No.1 is living at her paternal house and in absence of source of income she is fully dependent on her father. The respondent No.1 also made complaint before P.S. Mahila Thana Raipur and police has registered Crime No. 113/2013 in connection the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 323 of I.P.C. against the applicant and his family members on 23.10.2013 and the charge sheet has been filed before the J.M.F.C. Raipur. The applicant had filed reply and except the admitted fact denied all the contents of the application and also contended that the respondent No.1 has left her in law house without any sufficient reason, she is the only daughter of her parents and therefore she want to live with her mother and father. The father of the respondent No.1 is doctor and he is earning more than 1,00,000/- Rs. per month and he is also earning with other source of income like 3 rent of houses and agricultural income from ancestral property, on the other hand the applicant is Class-IV employee of SECR and having no sufficient income for his lively hood and for the above mentioned reason the respondent No.1 has left the house of the applicant with her minor son respondent No.2 Sanidhya Pathari and filed the application U/s 125 of Cr. P.C. before the learned Family Court. 4. Learned Family Court after taking evidence from both the parties decided the matter and passed the impugned order dated 27.02.2017, whereby the applicant was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- per month to the respondent No.1/wife and Rs. 3000/- per month to the respondent No.2/son (till he became adult) as amount of maintenance (total 8000/-) from the date of passing of the order and further ordered to bear Rs. 1000/- for expenses of the proceeding. Hence this revision petition. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned Family Court allowed the application for grant of maintenance and awarded Rs. 8,000/- towards the maintenance without appreciating the facts and evidence of the case. The learned Family Court ignored the fact, that the applicant is the Class-IV employee of the SECR and his other liabilities are to maintain of old mother, father, that the learned Family Court also failed to consider that the respondents have left the house of the applicant without any sufficient reason and looking to sufficient source of income of the respondent and her father, the impugned order deserves to be set-aside. He further submits that learned Family Court has passed the maintenance amount in higher side without considering the evidence of monthly income of the applicant. Therefore, the same is liable to be set-aside. 4 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with revision. 7. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that learned Family Court has held that the non-applicants has succeeded in proving her application. Therefore, keeping in view the social status of both the parties, monthly income of the applicant, the Family Court has granted maintenance of Rs.5000/- per month to the non-applicant No.1 and Rs. 3000/- per month to the non-applicant No.2 (Total 8000/-) as maintenance, which cannot be said to be shockingly on higher side. 8. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, perusing the documents appended with revision and finding recorded by learned Family Court while awarding the maintenance of Rs.8000/- per month to the non-applicants, I am of the considered view that learned Family Court has not committed any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 9. Accordingly, the revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal