1 2025:CGHC:45861 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 11 of 2020 Bikesh Kumar Thakur S/o Shambhu Thakur Aged About 23 Years Occupation Mechanic, R/o Proprietor Swagat Hair Saloon, Beside Parshad House, Bhatthapara, Ambikapur , District Surguja Chhattisgarh....(Non Applicant Before Family Court) ... Applicant versus 1. Dhanmet W/o Bikesh Thakur Aged About 24 Years D/o Heera Sai, R/o Aamgaon, Post Lundra, Police Station And Tahsil Lundra, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. 2. Atharv S/o Bikesh Thakur Aged About 02 Months , Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Dhanmet , R/o Aamgaon , Post Lundra , Police Station And Tehsil Lundra , District Surguja Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Applicant : Ms. Komal Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.09.2025 1. Heard Ms. Komal Yadav, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel, for the applicant. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the order dated ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.09.10 13:21:54 +0530 2 28.11.2019 passed by the learned Family Court, Ambikapur, District Surguja, (C.G.) in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 104/2018 and further be pleased to dismiss the application filed by respondents, in the ends of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1 preferred a case before the learned Family Court on the ground that about three years ago she entered into a love relationship with the applicant and, on 30.08.2017, they performed marriage at Durga Mandir. She further alleged that on 11.05.2018, a son, namely Atharva, was born, but the applicant and his relatives did not accept her and threw her out of the matrimonial house. Thus, she claimed Rs. 8,000/- as maintenance from the applicant. 4. The applicant filed his reply and stated that he had never contracted marriage with respondent No.1 and had not entered into any physical relationship with her. He further contended that Atharva is not his son and that respondent No.1 was in a relationship with her lover, due to which the child was born. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the case filed by the respondents. 5. Learned Family Court, after considering the evidence of both parties and examining the record, held that it stood proved that respondent No.1 is the wife of the applicant and that she is residing separately because the applicant had refused to keep her with him. Accordingly, the learned Family Court directed the applicant to pay Rs. 1,000/- - 1,000/- per month to the each respondents from the date of the order. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to 3 the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. He also submits that the marriage between the applicant and respondent No.1 has not been proved; therefore, the order passed by the Family Court is bad in law. The respondent No.1 has failed to establish that she is the legally wedded wife of the applicant; hence, she is not entitled to claim any maintenance. He further submits that learned Family Court failed to appreciate that no marriage had ever taken place between the parties. The applicant is a poor person, working as a mechanic, and his family members are dependent upon him. Therefore, it would be difficult for him to pay maintenance to the respondents. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the judgment of the learned Family Court. 8. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, materials available on record and also considering the price index and medical expenses, total amount awarded to the respondents cannot be said to be shockingly high warranting interference by this Court in the present revision petition. 9. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek