1 2025:CGHC:47301 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 360 of 2020 1. Smt. Binda Bai Kashyap W/o Ramshankar Kashyap, Aged About 26 Years At Present R/o House Of Sapna Gond Murum Khadan Bilaspur, Tahsil And District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2. Kumari Aaradhana Kashyap, D/o Shri Ramshankar Kashyap, Aged About 7 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Binda Bai Kashyap, At Present R/o House Of Sapna Gond Murum Khadan Bilaspur, Tahsil And District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Kumari Sadhana Kashyap, D/o Shri Ramshankar Kashyap, Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Binda Bai Kashyap, At Present R/o House Of Sapna Gond Murum Khadan Bilaspur, Tahsil And District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus Ramshankar Kashyap S/o Shri Chhote Lal Kashyap, Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Dholmauha, Post Office Mitthu Nawagaon, P.S. Kota Chowki Belgahana Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. Present Commercial Address Government High School Village Konchara, Tahsil Kota, Block/ P.S. Kota, Chowki Belgahana, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Nitansh Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Vijay K. Deshmukh, Advocate. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.09.16 17:43:30 +0530 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.09.2025 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicants being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal MJC No.298/2016, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application of the applicants filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C and the respondent is directed to pay a maintenance amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month each to Applicant No. 01, Applicant No. 02, and Applicant No. 03, totaling Rs. 9,000/- per month. This order effective from the date of the order. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the applicants have filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the Learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, seeking maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month from the respondent. As per the brief facts of the case, Applicant No.1 was married to the respondent in the year 2006 according to Hindu rites and customs. The parties are governed by Hindu Law. From the wedlock, two daughters were born. After some time, the respondent and his family members began to harass and torture Applicant No.1 for insufficient dowry. In this regard, Applicant No.1 lodged a complaint at Police Station Belgahana on 30.10.2012, upon which a case was registered under Sections 498-A, 323, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the respondent. Subsequently, the 3 respondent abandoned Applicant No.1 and forced her out of the matrimonial home. 3. On 10.05.2012, the applicants filed an application for maintenance, and the Family Court directed the respondent to cohabit with and support the applicants. However, the respondent again subjected Applicant No.1 to harassment and cruelty. Thereafter, another application for maintenance was filed. On 20.01.2013, the Lok Adalat directed the respondent to take care of Applicant No.1 and their daughters. Despite this, the respondent continued his abusive conduct and eventually abandoned the applicants again after four months. Since then, the applicants have been residing with the parents of Applicant No.1 and have no independent source of income. The respondent is employed as a Lecturer, earning approximately Rs. 32,000/- per month. Additionally, he owns 5 acres of agricultural land and runs a computer and photocopy business from his residence, earning an additional Rs. 8,000–10,000/- per month. Despite his financial capacity, the Family Court awarded only Rs. 9,000/- per month as maintenance, which is inadequate to meet the applicants' needs. 4. The respondent filed a written statement denying the allegations and claimed the applicants are not entitled to maintenance. After hearing both parties, the Learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, passed the impugned order. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the maintenance amount, the applicants have preferred this revision petition seeking enhancement of the 4 maintenance awarded. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicants. The learned Family Court failed to consider that the respondent, without any sufficient reason, abandoned Applicant No.1 and their two daughters, who are now residing at her parental home. The learned Family Court overlooked the fact that a social meeting was held between the parties to resolve their differences, but the respondent refused to resume cohabitation with the applicant. The respondent made no effort to reconcile or return to live with the applicants, despite having abandoned them without cause. The learned Court failed to consider that the respondent is employed as a Lecturer, earning Rs. 32,000/- per month. He also owns 5 acres of agricultural land and operates a computer and photocopy business from his residence, earning an additional Rs. 8,000–10,000/- per month. Therefore, the maintenance amount is liable to be enhanced. The respondent is well-educated and financially capable of paying the maintenance amount of Rs. 15,000/- as sought by the applicants. The respondent has himself admitted to receiving a monthly salary of Rs. 43,252/-, which is sufficient to support the maintenance claimed by the applicants. Hence, the maintenance amount is liable to be enhanced. The learned Family Court failed to consider that the applicants have no independent source of income. The maintenance amount granted is grossly inadequate and insufficient to meet their basic needs. 5 Therefore, the maintenance amount is liable to be enhanced. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the impugned order dated 31.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal MJC No.298/2016, whereby the learned Family Court has partly allowed the application of the applicants filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C and the respondent is directed to pay a maintenance amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month each to Applicant No. 01, Applicant No. 02, and Applicant No. 03, totaling Rs. 9,000/- per month, and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same, therefore, the instant revision filed by the applicant is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 8. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and from the perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, it transpires that after hearing all the statements of the witnesses and perusing the evidence available on record, the learned Family Court has passed the impugned order, and there is no any illegality and infirmity while passing the same which requires interference by this Court. 9. Accordingly, the present revision being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 6 10. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the Family Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti