1 2025:CGHC:36472 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1300 of 2024 Shrimati Amrika Sahu W/o Dukalu Ram Sahu Aged About 54 Years R/o Lakshmi Green City Lakshmi Nagar Risali Bhilai Police Station Nevai Tehsil And District - Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Dukalu Ram Sahu S/o Late Videshi Ram Aged About 57 Years R/o Qr. No. 133d Risali Sector Bhilai Police Station Newai Tehsil And District - Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Abhinav Tiwari, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 2 8.07.2025 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 21.08.2024 passed by the learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, (C.G.) in MJC (Criminal) No.955/2022, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. of the applicant/wife and directed the respondent/husband to pay amount of Rs. 4,000/- per month as maintenance to the applicant. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.07.29 15:56:57 +0530 2 2. The brief facts of the case is that the applicant and respondent were married in 1983 in Bilaspur, and from the wedlock, three daughters and one son were born. The couple resided in a government quarter allotted to the respondent, who is employed as a driver at Delhi Public School, Bhilai. All three daughters are now married and living in their respective matrimonial homes, while the son is employed in Raigarh. The respondent is addicted to alcohol and frequently brought his friends home for drinking and dinner, often forcing the applicant to prepare meat for them. After consuming alcohol, the respondent would become violent and subjected the applicant to physical and verbal abuse. Due to his addiction, the respondent stopped providing financial support to the Applicant, neglecting her basic needs such as food and clothing, compelling her to seek assistance from her daughters. On 16.03.2022, the Respondent forcibly evicted the Applicant from the government quarter, after which she took shelter at Green City, Risali, where she currently resides. She filed an application before the Family Court, Durg, seeking maintenance of ₹30,000 per month. By order dated 21.08.2024, the learned Family Court, Durg, directed the Respondent to pay ₹4,000 per month as maintenance. Being aggrieved by the inadequate quantum of maintenance awarded, the Applicant has preferred the present revision petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the Learned Family Court failed to consider the respondent’s salary of ₹59,674 while determining the maintenance amount of ₹4,000 per month. The Learned Family Court overlooked the applicant’s financial obligations, including the monthly rent of ₹5,500 paid by her, while arriving at the said maintenance amount. The Learned Family Court did not take into account the condition of the applicant, who is a middle-aged woman with no formal 3 education or independent means of livelihood. The applicant was compelled to leave her matrimonial home due to the respondent’s abusive behavior, and the respondent is financially capable of maintaining both himself and the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the impugned order dated 21.08.2024 passed by the learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, (C.G.) in MJC (Criminal) No.955/2022, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. of the applicant/wife and directed the respondent/husband to pay amount of Rs. 4,000/- per month as maintenance to the applicant, and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same, therefore, the instant revision filed by the applicant is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 6. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, it transpires that after all hearing all the statement 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 or 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 4 transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti