1 2025:CGHC:36573 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1335 of 2024 Sharda Kasat W/o Champak Lal Ji Kasat Aged About 63 Years D/o D-1, 503, Karishma Apartment, Near Railway Crossing Shriram Nagar, Raipur District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant versus Champak Lal Ji Kasat S/0 Late Shivratan Ji Kasai Aged About 77 Years R/o Basant Bahar 1, House No. 31, Near Gats Gymkhana, Bopal Ahmedabad, District Ambikapur C.G. ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Shobhit Koshta, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the learned 1st Additional Family Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in MCC No. 1169/2019, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant for grant of maintenance, and directed the respondent that he has to pay the allowance of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- per month to the applicant. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the applicant and respondent are husband and wife respectively and they got married as per the customs and traditions on 29/01/93 at Arya Samaj Mandir. The applicant and respondent were living peacefully and happily. It was the second marriage for both the parties. The respondent and his in-laws constantly used to harass the applicant and refused to accept the previous children of the applicant and despite all efforts and looking after the aged mother of the respondent, the applicant was constantly harassed by the respondent, his son and daughter-in-law, and was devoid basic medical facilities. So far as the income of the respondent is concerned, the applicant submitted that the respondent has multiple business and is earning about Rs. 30 lakhs and in view to deny the respondent maintenance is alienating his property in favor of their families and prayed for Rs. 7 lakhs monthly maintenance amount. 4. The respondent herein has filed the reply to the said application and has denied the averments raised by the applicant. The learned Family Court has recorded the statement of the parties. The witnesses were examined before the learned Family Court including the applicant and the respondent. The learned Family Court by passing the impugned order, has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant for grant of maintenance and directed the respondent to pay allowance of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- per month to the applicant. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the impugned order is contrary to the facts, law and circumstances of this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is an aged lady and she needs one knee replacement surgery. However, the learned Family Court has not taken the said fact into account and not granted maintenance for surgery 3 and hence, the amount of maintenance be enhanced. Therefore, the impugned order is contrary to the facts, and the same is liable to be modified. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, and from the perusal of the order of the Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, 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. 8. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 9. Let a certified copy of this order as well as original records be transmitted to the concerned trial Court within a week for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar