1 2025:CGHC:7941 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 222 of 2025 1 - Arjun Jaiswal S/o Jawahir Jaiswal Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Kusumjhar Thana And Tehsil Dabhra District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Smt. Ritu Jaiswal W/o Arjun Jaiswal Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Kusumjhar Dabhra Present Address Masaniya Khurd Thana And Tehsil Sakti District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sudhir Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 14/02/2025 1. The present Criminal Revision is filed by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 against the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sakti, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Case No. 91/2022. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the applicant 2 and respondent was solemnized on 14.02.2020 as per their social norms and tradition. The applicant and respondent never lived happily after their marriage, the applicant started abusing the respondent herein for demand of dowry and also started beating her and one day the respondent tried to commit suicide by pouring kerosene upon herself. Thereafter respondent filed and application under Section 12 read with Section 23 of Protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005. 3. After considering the application and reply filed by both the parties and the evidence adduced by both the parties, the learned family Court vide its order dated 09.01.2025 (Annexure A-1) granted amount of Rs. 2,000/- per month to the respondent, hence this revision is being filed to set aside the order of the Family Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is bad, illegal perverse and contrary to law and not applicable to the facts and circumstances fo the case. The learned Family Court has allowed the application of the maintenance amount of the respondent against the applicant and awarded the amount of Rs. 2000/- which is not justified and reasonable. The respondent made so many false allegation against the applicant regarding the cruelty and harassed the applicant and his family members. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the 3 record with utmost circumspection. 6. From perusal of record, it is crystal clear that the respondent is legally wedded wife of the applicant and who is unable to maintain herself. 7. The applicant/husband is a driver by profession and cannot be absolved from his liability and responsibility to maintain his wife. Since the wife is unable to maintain herself, therefore, a reasonable/sufficient amount is required for her maintenance which shall have to be paid by the husband, irrespective of the decree of dissolution of marriage. The amount of Rs. 2000/- as maintenance to wife is a very meager amount. 8. Therefore, this Court does not find any illegality or perversity or jurisdictional error in the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sakti, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) in Case No. 91/2022. 9. Accordingly, the present Criminal Revision is dismissed on merits. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima