1 2025:CGHC:27759 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1265 of 2018 1 - Smt. Sweta Kushwaha (Thakur) W/o Anand Singh Kushwaha @ Ravi Kushwaha (Thakur), Aged About 33 Years R/o Govindpur, Tahsil Kanker, District North Bastar, District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh 2 - Kumari Purvanshi (Pihu) Kushwaha (Thakur), Father Of Anand Singh Kushwaha @ Ravi Kushwaha (Thakur), Aged About 11 Years R/o Govindpur, Tahsil Kanker, District North Bastar Through The Legal Gardiun Mother Smt. Sweta Kushwaha, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Govindpur, Tahsil Kanker District North Bastar, District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Applicants(s) versus Shri Anand Singh Kushwaha @ Ravi Kushwaha (Thakur) S/o Dharmpal Kushwaha (Thakur), Grand Father Shri Gambhir Singh Kushwaha (Thakur), Aged About 34 Years R/o Kushmar Dak And Thana Kushmar, District Bhind (M.P.), District : Bhind, Madhya Pradesh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicants : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the applicants. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. I.A. No.1 of 2018 is an application for condonation of delay in filing the revision of 270 days. 3. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the revision is hereby condoned. 4. By way of this revision, the applicants have prayed for following relief: “It is therefore, prayed that the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the revision and grant the maintenance to the applicant No.1 and finding recorded by the learned Family Court Bastar (C.G.) is liable to the modified with suitable enhancement of the maintenance amount to the applicant No.2, in the interest of justice.” 5. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant No.1, Smt. Shweta Kushwaha (Thakur), was married to the non-applicant on 01/09/2004 as per Hindu rites and customs in a love marriage at Jagdalpur. After marriage, applicant No. 1 and the non-applicant resided together from September 2004 to 2005 at Kondagaon with the non-applicant’s father and applicant No. 1’s father-in-law, Shri Dharm Singh Kushwaha (Thakur), and fulfilled their marital responsibilities. Due to family disputes, applicant No. 1 and the non- applicant lived from 2006 to May 2010 at Bhelwapadar Forest Colony in Kondagaon and in the RES Colony quarters of her father- in-law, Shri Dharm Singh Kushwaha (Thakur). In May 2010, they moved from Kondagaon to Kanker and continued to live together as 3 husband and wife till March 2011. From this wedlock, daughter named Kumari Purvanshi Kushwaha (Thakur), was born on 06/06/2006. The applicant No. 1 belongs to the tribal Gond community and her parental home is in Kanker. Since the birth of the daughter, the non-applicant started to quarrel and physically abuse to applicant No. 1 repeatedly, taunting her for being a tribal (Gond) girl. After March 2011, the non-applicant left applicants No. 1 and 2 after a quarrel and went to Kumrawa Road, Bhimnagar, Bhind, Madhya Pradesh and never returned. Occasionally there were phone calls, but since June 2014 there has been no contact. He neither came to take them back nor provided any financial assistance. The applicant No. 1 is a law graduate but currently does not have her registration with the State Bar Council, due to which she has no source of income to sustain herself and her daughter. Her parents are upset due to the love marriage and have no relationship with her. All the expenses and maintenance of the applicant No.1 and applicant No.2/her daughter were being borne by her neighbor, Smt. Sheela Banpuriya, wife of Dr. B.N. Banpuriya, but currently, the neighbor is unable to continue supporting them. The applicant No.1 submitted an amended application on 23/10/2017, according to which she received a temporary appointment as a Child Welfare Officer on 1st August 2017, with a monthly salary of ₹17,500/- (Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Rupees), which has not yet been paid. The non-applicant has his own business and earns ₹50,000/- to ₹60,000/- (Fifty to Sixty Thousand Rupees) per month from it. His annual income is 4 ₹10,00,000/- (Ten Lakh Rupees). The applicant No.1 monthly maintenance expenses are ₹12,000/- (Twelve Thousand Rupees) and her daughter’s monthly expenses are ₹8,000/- (Eight Thousand Rupees), totaling ₹20,000 (Twenty Thousand Rupees) per month. Therefore, she along with her daughter filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Family Court concerned for grant of maintenance amount from the date of submission of the application from the non-applicant/husband. 6. Despite being duly served with a legal notice, the non-applicant remained absent on the scheduled date. Therefore, an ex-parte proceeding was initiated against the non-applicant, as recorded in the order sheet dated 27.09.2017. 7. Learned Family Court concerned after appreciating the evidence and material available on record, passed the impugned order dated 06.11.2017 ex-parte, whereby the non-applicant/husband was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- per month as maintenance to the applicant No.2/daughter from the date of filing of application till her marriage and dismissed the application of the applicant No.1/wife and further ordered to bear lump sum amount Rs. 4000/- for expenses of the proceeding. Hence, this revision petition for enhancement of maintenance amount. 8. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the learned Family Court did not consider the prayer as prayed by the applicants in their application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. He further submits that the application of applicant No.1 has been dismissed only on the ground that she was a working lady as she was appointed as 5 Child Welfare Officer as temporary basis and the applicant No.1 has been permitted from the services on 21.05.2018 therefore right now she has no sufficient means of airing even otherwise her services was on the temporary basis therefore the order passed by learned below court is libel to set-a side. The learned Family Court has come to the finding that the non applicant has been living with another women therefore the applicant No. 1 his leaving separately and in view of above facts the order passed by Court below is liable to be set-aside. He further submits that non applicant has sufficient means of earning therefore the amount awarded in favor of applicant No.2/daughter is very low therefore a fresh appreciation is required in the present case. The learned Family Court also erred in granting very low amount on the part of expenses for filing of the case, it may also be modified/enhanced by this Court. Thus the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is bad and illegal on all counts and liable to be set-aside. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with revision. 10. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court concerned after considering all the documents and evidence adduced by the parties has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants and has granted maintenance of Rs. 5000/- to the applicant No.2/daughter and dismissed the application of the applicant No.1/wife on the ground that the applicant No. 1 is a working lady as she has contractual employee in Suraj, Vikas Sansthan Balgirh in office of Kondagaon, 6 observing the income, social and economic status of both the parties and current price index, which cannot be said to be on lower side. 11.Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants and perusing the impugned order and the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, I am of the view that the learned Family Court has not committed any illegality or infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 12. Accordingly, the revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 13. 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