1 2025:CGHC:3333 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 02 of 2024 Suresh Kerwani S/o Late Shri Wadhumal Kerwani Aged About 39 Years R/o Gandhi Chowk Sonar Gali Korba, Tahsil and District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Madhu Kerwani W/o Shri Suresh Kerwani Aged About 39 Years, 2 - Kunal Kerwani S/o Shri Suresh Kerwani Aged About 13 Years, 3 - Vishal Kerwani S/o Shri Suresh Kerwani Aged About 10 Years, Respondents No.2 & 3 are minor through natural huardian mother Smt. Madhu Kerwani W/o. Shri Sures Kerwani. All are R/o in the house of Bhupendra Singh Domar House Imalipara, Purana Bus Stand Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Respondents Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 20/01/2025 1. Heard on I.A. No.01/2023, application for condonation of delay in filing the revision. 2. On due consideration and for the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the revision is condoned. 2 3. This criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 being aggrieved by the order dated 01.04.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No.1154/2022 (Annexure P/1), whereby the application under Section 125 of CrPC for grant of maintenance filed by the non-applicants has been partly allowed. 4. Brief facts of this case are that that the marriage of the applicant was taken place with non applicant No.1/respondent No.1 on 01.02.2008 at Korba as per the Hindu rites and customs. Out of their wedlock, they are having two children and at present the children are residing with their mother. Respondent No. 03 is physically and mentally handicapped from birth. The applicant was always abused by the non- applicant and her family members and harassed her. Fed up with this, the respondent came to her home in Bilaspur and in the meantime the applicant used to come to Bilaspur and take care of her, but later he started consuming alcohol, gambling, betting etc. Due to this, there were disputes between them and the applicant beat up and harassed the respondent No.1 by abusing her and then stopped giving any expenses. The respondent has no source of income. The applicant runs a shop in Korba from where he earns Rs. 2,00,000/- per month and also earns Rs. 3,00,000/- per month from other sources. Thus, respondents filed the application u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. with claiming a maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month from the applicant. 3 5. On 17.02.2023 an ex-parte proceeding has been drawn against the applicant. When the applicant came to know about the ex-parte proceeding, he filed an application u/s 126 for setting aside the ex- parte proceedings on 09.03.2023 i.e. on next date of hearing the said application is replied by the respondents and vide order dated 01.04.2023, the application for setting aside the ex-parte proceeding has been rejected mentioning that, there is no proper explanation for non-appearance of the applicant on 17.02.2023 though he had appeared on 12.12.2022 and 24.01.2023, but when the case was fixed for filing the reply of the u/s 125 application he could not appear. 6. 6. The learned trial Court did not consider the fact that due to personal reason applicant could not appear on 17.02.2023 and on 09.03.2023 he appeared before the family court and also filed the application for setting aside the ex-parte proceeding, but the learned court below did not consider the same and on the basis of ex-parte evidence affidavit under Order 18 Rule 4 of CPC passed and passed the order of maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month in favour of respondent no. 1, Rs. 3,000/- per month for respondent no. 2 and Rs.7,000/- per month for the respondent no. 3 i.e. total a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month has been ordered. Hence, the present revision. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the learned family court erred in passing the order of maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month in favor of the non-applicants though the applicant has no source of income to maintain himself and the rent of shop is also 4 received by the non-applicant no. 1. On the assurance of the non- applicant/wife, applicant left his house in the year 2011 and started residing in his in- laws house (Sasural) and all of sudden in the year 2018 non-applicant ousted him though number of occasions a family meeting as well as community meeting was taken place, but non- applicant no. 1 is not ready to keep him with her, therefore, he taken the shelter in the house of his brother and at present totally dependent upon him on his mercy. He further contended that the learned Family Court has not given an opportunity to file the reply and to produce the evidence and drawn the ex-parte proceeding on 17.02.2023 and on 09.03.2023, the application for setting aside the ex-parte proceeding has been filed the same is also dismissed. It is therefore, prayed that the criminal revision may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 01.04.2023 which relates to respondent No./non-applicant No.1 may kindly be set aside, application filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed by the non-applicant No. 1 may kindly be dismissed, in the interest of justice. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order available on record with utmost circumspection. 9. Considering the facts of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and from perusal of the record, it is evident that after taking into consideration, the learned trial Court has granted interim maintenance amount of Rs.5,000/- per month in favour of respondent no.1, Rs. 3,000/- per month for respondent no. 2 and Rs.7,000/- per 5 month for the respondent no. 3 i.e. total a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month, applicant is husband of the respondent No.1 and father of respondents No.2 & 3, has to pay the said maintenance amount. 10. Further, on perusal of the order under challenge, it is evident that the learned Family Court has discussed the factors while arriving at a finding is just and proper. From perusal of the same, it is evident that the applicant and respondent No.1 were married according to their customs and due to the harassment by the applicant, respondents had to reside separately. Thereafter, she is facing great hardships and is unable to maintain herself. The respondents have been living separately from the applicant after they were deserted and hence, the learned Family Court has rightly determined the total amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs.15,000/- per month to the respondents, therefore, in the opinion of this Court that there is no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order dated 01.04.2023 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Family Court, Bilaspur (C.G.). 11. Accordingly, the present criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed and stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant