1 2025:CGHC:11972 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 331 of 2025 1 - Chandan Sahu S/o Kamlesh Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o Village- Semra Dih, P.S. And Tehsil- Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Homeshwari Sahu W/o Chandan Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o- Dupchera P.S. And Tehsil- Gurur District- Balod (C.G.) 2 - Ku. Lekhni Sahu D/o Chandan Sahu Aged About 5 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Homeshwari Sahu, R/o- Dupchera P.S. And Tehsil- Gurur District- Balod (C.G.) 3 - Ku. Navya Sahu D/o Chandan Sahu Aged About 2 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Homeshwari Sahu, R/o- Dupchera P.S. And Tehsil- Gurur District- Balod (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Non-applicant : None. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11/03/2025 1. The present criminal revision under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act has been preferred by the applicant assailing the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.05.19 12:40:53 +0530 2 order dated 28.01.2025 passed by the learned Family Court Balod, Chhattisgarh, in Misc. Cr. Case No. 94/2024 whereby an appeal under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the respondent/wife has been allowed. 2. The facts of the case are that, the marriage between applicant and Non-applicant No. 1 was solemnized on 20/04/2016 as per their rites and rituals and two female children were born out of their wedlock namely Lekhni Sahu aged 05 years and Navya Sahu aged 02 years. The applicant and Non-applicant No. 1 were living their matrimonial life together but after marriage, the Non-applicant No. 1 went to her matrimonial house. The Non- applicant No. 1 has alleged in her application under section 125 of Cr.P.C. that the martial relation between the applicant and the Non-applicant No. 1 remained usual for two years and in between the Non-applicant No. 1 gave birth to Non- applicant no.2 Lekhni on 31/08/2018, but after that the applicant started having extra martial affair with another women, the Non- applicant No. 1 complained this fact to her parents and thereafter a social meeting was held on 18/07/2019 and 24/07/2019 where the applicant made an apology to the Non- applicant No. 1. When the behavior of the applicant continued the same and he was continuing his extra martial affair the Non-applicant No. 1 on 31/07/2023 took both her child with her and since then she is residing at her paternal home. The applicant has submitted that he is not having affair with any women and he is not in the knowledge of any women named 3 Durga the applicant submits that there is no physical relationship between the two parties for three month due to which the applicant used to suspect the applicant with another women. The applicant used to take care of his wife and children. Even today he wants to cohabitate with the Non-applicant No. 1 and he tried to go to his in-laws house to take back the Non- applicant No. 1 and his children but the Non-applicant No. 1 denied going with the applicant. The family of applicant has blocked his number due to which he is unable to speak to his children. The applicant has come under the influence of her parents and has their house and is voluntarily living in parents house and is ruining future of the children. Thereafter applicant and her family members made attempts for living together; the non applicant had organized a meeting at the applicants maternal home village pride. After recording of evidence on 28.01.2025 learned judge Family court has passed the order and held that the income of non applicant is 50,000/- so the applicant is entitled for maintenance of Rs 7,000/- per month, hence, this revision on the following grounds. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant (Husband) submits that respondent has left her matrimonial house without any sufficient reason and also not made any effort to come back and reside with the applicant. He further submits that learned Family Court has failed to see that the respondent has failed to prove the income of applicant and did not produce any documents with aforesaid regard. He also submits that 4 respondent of doubtful nature and she always keeps doubt on the applicant that he is having extra marital affair, hence the maintenance is liable to be set-aside. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the records. 5. On perusal of records, it transpires the fact that the respondent No.-1 had filed application u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. before the learned, Family Court, Balod, C.G. and the same was allowed on 28.01.2025 and granted Rs.3,000/- to the respondent No.1 and Rs.2000/-2,000/- to the Respondent No.2 and 3 as maintenance. 6. Considering facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the facts that the respondent No.1 had to leave her matrimonial house and had to reside with her children separately and the respondent No.2 and 3 are studying and from the evidence laid by the respondent Smt. Homeshwari Sahu, the applicant is a habitual drinker and he is having affair with other women (Durga) and applicant has accepted his extra marital affair in Article-A/1 and keeping in view the time elapsed and and there is sufficient reasons for the wife to reside separately to her husband. The increase in inflation because of which she is facing great hardships and is unable to maintain herself, this Court is of the opinion that and perusal from the records it observed that the applicant has own vehicle and 1.5 acre land, therefore, the learned Family Court has rightly passed the impugned order dated 28.01.2025, and granted 5 Rs.3,000/- to the respondent No.1 and Rs.2,000/-2,000/- to respondent No.2 and 3 as maintenance, in which there is no need for interference. 7. This Court of the considered view, there is neither illegality nor perversity in the order impugned and also there is no judicial error committed by the learned Family Court. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE vaishali