1 2025:CGHC:38450 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1206 of 2022 1. Savita Lakda W/o Sanjeet Lakda Aged About 25 Years R/o Sunder Ekka (Father), Khatikpara, Namnakala, Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) 2. Abhinav Lakda S/o Sanjeet Lakda Aged About 1 Years And 6 Months, Through Smt. Savita Lakda (Mother) R/o Sunder Ekka (Father), Khatikpara, Namnakala, Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Sanjeet Lakda S/o Karam Sai Lakda Aged About 30 Years Occupation - Commercial Vehical Driver, R/o Village - Jigadi Basen, Police Station - Rajpur, Tahsil - Rajpur, District - Balrampur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shishir Dixit, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04.08.2025 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 10.10.2022 passed by the learned Family Court, Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No.139/2021, whereby the application for grant of maintenance preferred by the Applicant No. 1/wife has been rejected and meager amount of Rs. 1,000/- has been awarded in favour of applicant No.2. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.08.06 10:45:59 +0530 2 2. The brief facts of the case is that the marriage between the Applicant and the Respondent was solemnized on 10.02.2016 at Ambikapur in accordance with Christian rites and ceremonies. The matrimonial relationship as legally wedded husband and wife is still subsisting. After marriage, the Applicant accompanied the Respondent to Village Jhigdi Basen, Tehsil Rajpur, District Balrampur (C.G.) and continued to perform her marital duties. One child, Abhinav Lakda (aged about 1 year), was born out of the said wedlock. The behavior of the Respondent and his family members remained cordial for the initial six months of marriage. Thereafter, the Respondent and his family began subjecting the Applicant to cruelty and mental harassment. The Respondent’s conduct deteriorated progressively, becoming abusive and inhumane, in complete disregard of social and marital norms. Eventually, the Applicant and her child were denied entry into the matrimonial home by her in-laws, forcing her to live with her father at Khatikpara, Namnakala, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). On February 2021, when the Respondent and his family made no effort to bring the Applicant and her child back, the Applicant’s father, accompanied by relatives and neighbors, visited the Respondent’s house at Jhigdi Basen. They discovered that the Respondent was cohabiting with another woman, treating her as his illegitimate wife. Despite repeated requests by the Applicant’s father to restore the matrimonial relationship, the Respondent refused and instead suggested that the Applicant and her child live with him and his illegitimate partner. 4. That the Respondent continued to show no willingness to reconcile. Consequently, the Applicant filed a complaint before the Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). Both parties were summoned for counseling. Following police advice, the Respondent briefly took the Applicant to his village but soon abandoned 3 her and fled. The Applicant remained at her in-laws' house for six months, waiting for her husband. Facing starvation, she returned to her parental home. Being uneducated and without means to support herself, she was forced to depend on her aged parents and filed an application under Section 125 CrPC before the Family Court, Ambikapur, seeking maintenance. 3. The respondent belongs to a financially well-off farming family owning approximately 15 hectares of agricultural land. He earns an annual income of Rs. 6,00,000 by cultivating and selling crops and vegetables in the government mandi and to private vendors. Additionally, the Respondent is a professional driver with a monthly income of Rs. 25,000. The Applicant filed an application under Section 125 CrPC on 16.09.2021 before the learned Family Court, Ambikapur, seeking monthly maintenance of Rs. 10,000 for herself and her minor son. The Court, after recording evidence, delivered its judgment on 10.10.2022. As per the judgment dated 10.10.2022, the learned Family Court partially allowed the application, awarding Rs. 1,000 per month only for the maintenance of the minor son (Applicant No. 2), and rejected the claim of the Applicant (wife) for any maintenance. The learned Family Court, Ambikapur, has passed the impugned judgment without properly appreciating the evidence on record. Hence, the Applicant is challenging the said judgment by way of this revision petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the learned Family Court passed the impugned order on surmises and conjectures. He further submits that the Learned Family Court, Ambikapur, Surguja, C.G. hurriedly and without appreciating the facts, law and the material evidences available on record, passed the impugned order dated 4 10.10.2022 rejecting the application of applicant for grant of maintenance from his husband without considering the fact that applicant No. 1 is a tribal illiterate house wife who was totally dependent upon her husband and presently dependent upon her parents and she is unable to maintain herself and his child without the financial support of his husband. Hence, the impugned order is illegal and is liable to be set-aside. 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 impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, 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 which requires interference by this Court. 7. Accordingly, the present revision being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 8. Let a copy of this order as well as original record of this case be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti