1 2025:CGHC:3086 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 82 of 2025 Ramprakash S/o Ramlakhan Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Paldaraina, P.S. Pasan, District Korba (C.G.) Present Address 42 N.D.B.N Seema Suraksha Bal Nanpara, Baharaich (U.P.) … Applicant versus 1 - Mamta W/o Ramprakash Aged About 26 Years 2 - Aarav S/o Ramprakash Aged About 3 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Mamta W/o Ramprakash, Both are R/o Paldaraina, P.S. Pasan, District Korba (C.G.) Present Address Village Sakariya, P.S. And Tahsil Khadganva District Korea (C.G.). ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 17/01/2025 Heard. 1. This criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 being aggrieved by the order dated 06.11.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh, District Korea (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case 2 No.115/2019, whereby the Family Court has granted interim maintenance total amount of Rs.5,000/- per month (Rs.3,000/- for respondent No.1 and Rs.2,000/- for respondent No.2), hence this revision is being filed on the following facts. 2. Brief facts of this case are that on 05.02.2014, the applicant had solemnized marriage along with respondent no. 1 according to Hindu rites and rituals and on their wedlock, the respondent no. 2 born on 29.06.2016. It is further alleged that after some time of marriage, the applicant and his family members assaulted her and also demanded money. Respondents are living separately at her parental home. 3. After issuing the notice to the applicant, the applicant has filed reply and denied the all averment pleaded in the application and executed affidavit and it is stated that the respondent no. 1 has quarreled with the applicant without any reasons and respondent has left at her matrimonial house from her own will. 4. The learned Family Court passed the order dated 06.11.2024, whereby allowed the interim maintenance application of the respondents and directed the applicant to pay the maintenance amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month (Rs. 3,000/- for respondent no. 1 and Rs. 2,000/- for respondent no. 2). Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the impugned order passed by learned the Family Court is completely illegal, erroneous, 3 arbitrary, and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. He further contended that the learned Family Court has failed to see that the applicant has never acted with the respondent and the applicant has always try to manage his matrimonial life, but the respondent no. 1 has refused to live with applicant together and hence the interim maintenance is liable to be set-aside and it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow criminal revision and set- áside/quash impugned order dated 06.11.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh, District Korea, Chhattisgarh, in the interest of justice. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order available on record with utmost circumspection. 7. 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 Family Court has granted interim maintenance amount of Rs.5,000/- per month (Rs.3,000/- for respondent No.1 and Rs.2,000/- to respondent No.2). 8. From perusal of the record of the trial Court, it transpires that respondent No.1/wife has no source of income, she is residing in her parental home with her minor son/respondent No.2 and she is struggling to support herself, hence, the Family Court granted the interim maintenance to the non-applicants/respondents under Section 4 125 of CrPC, applicant is husband of the respondent No.1 and father of respondent No.2, has to pay the said interim maintenance amount. 9. 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 were married according to their customs and it is alleged that due to the harassment by the applicant, respondent 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 amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs.5,000/- per month to the respondents, therefore, in the opinion of this Court that there is no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order dated 06.11.2024 (Annexure A-1) passed by the Family Court, Manendragarh, District Korea (C.G.). 10. Accordingly, the present criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed and stands disposed of. 11.Meanwhile, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR