1 2025:CGHC:49395 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1204 of 2025 Janakdhari S/o Shivnath Aged About 50 Years Occupation- Painter, R/o Village- Kathautiya, Police Station And Tehsil- Manendragarh, District Koriya (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus Shyam Bai W/o Janakdhari Aged About 45 Years R/o Village- Kanchanpur, Police Station And Tehsil- Baikunthpur, District- Koriya (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aman Upadhayay, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 26 /09/2025 1. Heard Mr. Aman Upadhayay, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The present criminal revision has been filed by the applicant against the order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Manendragarh Camp, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.), in Misc. Criminal Case No. 160/2023. By the earlier order dated 07.01.2017, the learned Family Court had granted maintenance of Rs. 500/- per month to the applicant under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Thereafter, in view of the increased expenses and changed circumstances, the non-applicant filed an application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. before the Family Court seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount. The learned Family Court, after considering the submissions and financial capacity of the parties, partly allowed the application of the non-applicant and enhanced the monthly maintenance from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 6,000/-. 3. The present criminal revision is beyond time as has been reported by the Registry. 4. From perusal of application for condonation of delay, it is apparent that the applicant has not given day to day explanation of inordinate delay of 84 days in filing the revision, as such, the revision is barred by delay and laches and is not liable to be entertained. 5. Considering the grounds raised in I.A. No. 02/2025, I do not find any good ground to condone the delay of 84 days in preferring the revision. 6. Accordingly, I.A. No. 02/2025 is rejected and consequently thereto, the revision is also dismissed. 7. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Family Court concerned for necessary information and follow up action. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal