1 2025:CGHC:52331 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 818 of 2021 Smt. Ahilya Devi W/o Shri Rampukar, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Kodatarai Police Station- Jute Mill Tehsil- Pussore District- Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant versus Rampukar S/o Devanandan Singh Aged About 62 Years R/o Kodatarai Police Station- Jute Mill Tehsil- Pussore, District-Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Roop Ram Naik, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.10.2025 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 05.10.2021 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Raigarh (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.10.28 10:30:33 +0530 2 F- 154/2019, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application filed by the applicant under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and directed the respondent/husband to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month to the applicant/wife. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant and the respondent entered into wedlock about 45–46 years ago. After several years of marriage, two sons and one daughter were born out of their wedlock. As time passed and the children grew older, certain conflicts arose between the applicant and the respondent, due to which the respondent started tormenting the applicant. The applicant was subjected to continuous and unbearable harassment by the respondent. further, the respondent developed an illicit relationship with one Rukni Yadav. Thereafter, the respondent began tormenting the applicant with the intention that she, of her own free will, would leave the matrimonial home, enabling the respondent to live with the said Rukni Yadav. However, when this plan did not materialize, the harassment and torment by the respondent increased day by day. Due to such torment, the respondent stopped providing household expenses for the applicant and failed to give her any financial support. Consequently, the applicant’s health deteriorated as she was deprived of proper nourishment and care. Having lost all hope, the applicant filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking interim maintenance from the respondent. The Learned Family Court, vide order dated 03.01.2020, granted interim maintenance of Rs.2,000/- per month to the applicant. However, 3 even thereafter, the respondent failed to pay the said amount regularly and in a timely manner. Subsequently, the applicant, on 18.10.2019, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, claiming maintenance from the respondent under various heads. After recording the evidence of both parties, the Learned Family Court, Raigarh, vide order dated 05.10.2021, directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs10,000/- per month to the applicant as maintenance. However, the said amount is meagre and insufficient to meet the applicant’s daily needs and living expenses. Therefore, the applicant has preferred the present revision petition seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the order passed by the Learned Family Court, Raigarh, suffers from material irregularities and errors in appreciation of evidence and is, therefore, liable to be modified in accordance with the evidence available on record. The respondent is not willing to reside peacefully with the applicant, as he has coerced her to leave the matrimonial home and intends to live with another woman with whom he is maintaining an illicit relationship. From the malafide intentions and conduct of the respondent, it is evident that the Learned Family Court failed to properly appreciate the fact that the respondent possesses substantial movable and immovable properties, including buses, agricultural fields, and other assets. It has also been brought on record that the respondent attempted to transfer some of these properties to another son through an Ikrarnama, which has been taken into evidence. These unlawful acts of the respondent clearly 4 demonstrate his dishonest intention to deprive the applicant of her rightful maintenance and financial support. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is a comprehensive code governing the rights, liabilities, and obligations arising out of a marriage between two Hindus. Sections 24 and 25 thereof provide for maintenance to a spouse who lacks sufficient independent income for his or her support and necessary expenses. These provisions are gender-neutral, enabling either spouse to seek maintenance during the pendency of proceedings, provided the applicant has no adequate means for sustenance. The economic abuse includes the deprivation of financial or economic resources to which the aggrieved person is lawfully entitled whether payable under a Court order, custom, or out of necessity such as household expenses, maintenance, or support for her and her children. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/husband opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the Family Court after considering all the documents and evidence adduced by the parties has passed the order, in which no interference is called for. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order, pleadings and documents appended thereto. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and from the perusal of the orders of the Family Court, it transpires that it has been stated by the respondent/husband that he has given portions of his owned agricultural land to his sons through 5 partition. During his cross-examination, he admitted that three acres of land are still under his ownership and that he sells about 55–56 quintals of paddy every year. The respondent has further stated in his chief examination that he earns approximately Rs.5,000 per month from running a roadside eatery (dhaba). From these facts, it can be inferred that the respondent earns a sufficient income from agriculture and other sources. It is also evident from the evidence on record that the respondent has been elected as the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat and is presently serving as the Up-Sarpanch. Thus, from the evidence brought on record, it is established that the applicant is the wife of the respondent, and that the respondent has made no arrangement for her maintenance. The evidence further clearly shows that the applicant is not capable of maintaining herself, whereas the respondent, being her husband, is legally bound and financially capable of maintaining her. Thus, in the considered opinion of this Court, the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is just and proper, warranting no interference by this Court. 7. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court. 8. Accordingly, the present revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 9. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit this order as well as 6 original record of this case to the concerned Family Court within three days from today for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti