1 2025:CGHC:50849 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1231 of 2025 Subodh Bhardwaj S/o Achchheram Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Virat Nagar, Pandav Para, Khond, P.S. Patna, Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - Rajeshwari Khandey W/o Subodh Bhardwaj Aged About 26 Years R/o Behind Petrol Pump, Pamgarh, P.S. Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sanvi Bhardwaj D/o Subodh Bhardwaj Aged About 1 Years Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Rajeshwari Khandey, R/o Behind Petrol Pump, Pamgarh, P.S. Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Mirza Hafeez Baig, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.10.2025 1. Heard Mr. Mirza Hafeez Baig, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the judgment dated 30.04.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Janjgir, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in M.Cr.C. No. 120/2025, whereby the learned Family Court, allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the respondents, and ordered the applicant/husband that he has to pay the allowance for maintenance at the rate of total Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondents. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The facts, in brief, is that the respondents have filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC for seeking maintenance. On 13.05.2022 the applicant had solemnized marriage with the respondent No.1 according to Hindu Custom since them the respondent No.1 was living with the applicant at her matrimonial house and out of their wedlock, respondent No.2 born. As per the allegations made by the respondent No.1, after some time of the marriage, the applicant and his family members were harassing and torturing in the name of less dowry and has also committed marpeet with the respondent No.1 by using filthy language and the applicant also demanded dowry with cruel from the respondent No.1 and hence, the respondent No.1 left her matrimonial house and residing with her daughter i.e. respondent No.2 at her parental house. 4. The applicant has filed the reply and denied the contention of the application filed by the respondents. The learned Family Court after recording the evidence of the parties passed the impugned order, whereby the learned Family Court allowed the application of the respondents and directed to the applicant to pay the total amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondents. The impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is without any appreciation of facts, and material available on record only on the basis of arbitrary manner, thus, the impugned order is completely illegal. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, is contrary to the facts and evidence available on record. It is further submitted that the respondent No.1 without any sufficient reason has left the house of the applicant and voluntarily living separately from him. Therefore, she is not entitled to get the maintenance from the applicant as per the provisions of Section 3 125(4) of CrPC. Therefore, the impugned order is bad in law, perverse and erroneous, and the same it is liable to be set-aside/quashed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. 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. 8. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 9. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar