1 2025:CGHC:43391 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1059 of 2025 Smt. Vedirani Sahu W/o Shri Vasudev Sahu Aged About 26 Years (Now Aged About 30 Years) R/o Pitrugrih, Village Bharatmata Chowk, Vikas Nagar Gudiyari, Police Station Gudiyar, Tahsil And District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant versus Vasudev Sahu S/o Shri Daulal Sahu Aged About 28 Years (Now Aged About 32 Years), R/o Village Mohndi, Police Station Magarlod, Tehsil- Magarlod, Dist.- Dhamtari C.G. ---- Respondents For Applicant : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 26.08.2025 1. None appears for the applicant to press this revision on repeated calls. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 08.01.2025 passed by the learned 1st Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Case No. 685/2021, whereby the learned Family Court, by passing the impugned order, directed the respondent to pay the maintenance to the tune of Rs. 3,000/- per month to the applicant. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the marriage of the applicant with the respondent was solemnized on 25.06.2020, as per Hindu Rites and RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Customs. After the marriage the applicant began residing with the respondent at her matrimonial home and discharged all medical obligations. The applicant has filed case under Section 125 of CrPC in CA No. 1364/2025 in the learned Family Court. The relation between the applicant and the respondent become strained and dispute arose between the parties on or about 18.12.2022, due to which the applicant was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the respondent. Subsequently, she lodged an FIR against the husband under Section 498-A of the IPC. Being compelled to live separately and having no source of income, the applicant filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC before the Family Court seeking monthly maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- from the respondent. 4. After issuing notice to the respondent, the respondent filed reply and denied the allegations contained in the application under Section 125 of CrPC. After hearing the parties, learned Family Court by passing the impugned order, directed the respondent to pay the maintenance to the tune of Rs. 3,000/- per month to the applicant. Hence, this revision. 5. From the perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the applicant happens to be the wife of the respondent, and she has been granted maintenance by the learned Family Court to the tune of Rs. 3,000/-, which was directed to be paid by the respondent/husband per month to the applicant, and she has filed this revision before this Court for enhancement of the said amount of maintenance. But, 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 there is no any illegality and infirmity while passing the same warranting interference by this Court. 3 6. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 7. After passing of this order, Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the applicant appeared and prays that his presence may be marked. 8. 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