1 2025:CGHC:2390 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 64 of 2025 Dhanesh Verma S/o Dwarika Verma Aged About 48 Years Occupation- Agriculture, R/o Sukhatal, Police Station And Tahsil- Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.). … Applicant versus Sahodra Bai Verma W/o Dhanesh Verma Aged About 45 Years Occupation- Nothing R/o Sukhatal, Present Address- Bodhaikunda, Police Station And Tahsil- Pipariya, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Basant Kaiwartya & Mr. Shyamta Prasad Sannat, Advocates Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 15/01/2025 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 25.10.2024 (Annexure A-1) passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) in Mis. Criminal Case No.133/2023, whereby the application under Section 127 of 2 CrPC for grant of maintenance filed by the non-applicant has been partly allowed, hence this revision is being filed on the following facts. 2. Brief facts of this case are that earlier the non- applicant had filed an application before the learned Family Court under Section 127 of Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of the maintenance amount. The learned Family Court enhanced the maintenance amount and passed order for grant of Rs.1300/- per month to the non-applicant vide order dated 08.07.2016. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the non-applicant filed criminal revision before this Hon'ble Court, in which this Hon'ble Court pleased to an order to enhance the maintenance amount from Rs. 1300/- to Rs. 1500/- vide order dated 13.03.2020. Thereafter, the non-applicant filed an application under Section 127 of Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Family Court seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount from the applicant. It was pleaded inter-alia in her application that the price hiked from 7-8 years, due to which the non-applicant is unable to maintain herself in Rs. 1500/- per month. The non-applicant is physically weak and poor woman, her health is not good, she always needs medicine and treatment. It was further pleaded that the present applicant is a resourceful and rich farmer. He has 15 acres agricultural land which is irrigated land. He has a tractor also. He is earning a huge amount from the agriculture and other works. His two brothers are government servants and residing in a joint family. Looking to the above 3 circumstances, the non-applicant prayed to enhance the amount of maintenance from 1500/- to Rs. 30,000/- per month. The applicant filed his written statement before the learned Family Court denying the adverse allegations made by the non- applicant. The present applicant stated that he is a poor person. His health is also always remains poor, hence the maximum earning has been expended in doctor, medical, fruits etc. He is living in very painful life. If the above amount is enhanced, then the present applicant will unable to pay. The present applicant has no any agricultural land. He is working as agriculture labour in another farmer's field. Hence. the present applicant is unable to pay the amount more than Rs.1,500/-. 3. After taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and submission made by the parties, the learned Family Court vide its order dated 25.10.2024 (Annexure A-1) enhanced amount of Rs. 1,000/- per month thus the total maintenance amount of Rs. 2,500/- per month which is higher side. Hence, this revision is being filed. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the impugned order is illegal, invalid, contrary to the law and procedure suffering from illegality and perversity and hence, it is liable to be set-aside. He further contended that the Family Court while enhancing the maintenance to the non-applicant has failed to appreciate that the present applicant stated that he is a poor person. His health is also always remains poor, 4 hence the maximum earning has been expended in doctor, medical, fruits etc. He is living in very painful life. He is paying the maintenance to the non-applicant by taking loan. The present applicant has no any agricultural land. He is working as agriculture labour in another farmer's field. Hence, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the revision and be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 25.10.2024 (Annexure A-1), in the interest of justice. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order available on record with utmost circumspection. 6. 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 enhanced the maintenance amount only Rs.1,000/-, i.e., from Rs.1,500/- to Rs.2,500/-. 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 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 respondent has 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 respondent, therefore, in the opinion of this Court that there is no illegality and 5 infirmity in the impugned order dated 25.10.2024 (Annexure A-1) passed by the Family Court, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.). 7. 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