1 2025:CGHC:49791 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1215 of 2025 Zainul Haque S/o Shri Nazrul Haque Aged About 31 Years R/o Motijharan, P.S. Dhanupali, Sambalpur, District - Sambalpur, Orissa ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Hina Kausar W/o Zainul Haque, D/o Shabbir Ali Aged About 23 Years R/o Pandari, Kali Nagar, Imambada, Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Aaziya Zara Fatima D/o Shri Zainul Haq Aged About 2 Years (At Present 6 Years, Under The Guardianship Of Her Mother), R/o Pandari, Kali Nagar, Imambada, Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Jitendra Nath Nande, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07 /10/2025 1. Heard Mr. Jitendra Nath Nande, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The applicant has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 21.07.2025 passed by learned 2nd Additional Principal AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Case No.63/2022, whereby learned Family Court has granted Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent No.1 and Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent No.2 as interim maintenance in the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. 3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this criminal revision are that, the marriage of respondent No.1 with the applicant was solemnized on 28.12.2018 at Uphar Palace, Sambalpur, Odisha, according to Muslim customs and rituals. From their wedlock, a daughter named Ajia alias Zara Fatima was born on 06.12.2019. After the birth of the child, the respondent and his family members began to mentally and emotionally harass the applicant. The respondent is alleged to be of aggressive temperament and used abusive and insulting language towards the applicant. He continuously subjected her to cruelty and made every possible attempt to force her out of the matrimonial home. Owing to such conduct, the applicant was compelled to leave her matrimonial house on 06.10.2020 and started residing at her relative’s place in Kumbharpada, P.S. Dhanupali, District Sambalpur (Odisha). It is further alleged that the respondent unlawfully retained all the stridhan, jewellery, and personal belongings of the applicant and even attempted to kill her on several occasions. In this regard, FIR Nos. 287/2021 and 333/2021 were registered at Police Station Dhanupali. The applicant has no source of income and is unable to maintain herself and her minor child, hence, she has 3 prayed for grant of interim maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month from the respondent. Thereafter, the applicant has filed his reply and denied the allegations as alleged by the respondents. The Family Court after considering the documents and evidence adduced by the parties has directed to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent No.1 and Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent No.2 towards interim maintenance. Hence, the revision petition. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned Family Court has erred in law and facts in awarding an excessive interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month (Rs.5,000/- each to respondent Nos. 1 and 2) without properly considering the applicant’s limited income from a small cloth shop in Sambalpur and his responsibility to maintain his aged father and sisters. The marriage between the parties already stands dissolved through a valid Talaq executed before the Qazi, and hence respondent No. 1 is not legally entitled to claim maintenance as a wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. He further submits that the Family Court also failed to note that respondent No. 1 is young, educated, and capable of earning, and that she voluntarily left the matrimonial home on 06.10.2020 without any sufficient reason. He also submits that she had earlier filed false and vexatious complaints under the Domestic Violence Act, where interim maintenance of Rs.3,000/- was already being paid, and the present proceeding amounts to double benefit. The impugned order, therefore, being arbitrary, excessive, and contrary to settled legal principles 4 regarding maintenance of a divorced Muslim woman, is liable to be set-aside in the interest of justice. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with criminal revision. 6. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the Family Court has granted Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent No.1 and Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent No.2 as interim maintenance in the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C, observing that the marriage between the respondent No.1 (Hina Kauser) and the applicant (Zainul Haque) was duly solemnized on 28.12.2018 according to Muslim customs, and their minor daughter, Aaziya alias Zara Fatima, was born from the said wedlock. The respondent did not deny the marital relationship or the paternity of the child. The Family Court further observed that there is no evidence to show that the respondent No.1 remarried after the alleged divorce. Considering these circumstances, the Court held that the respondents are entitled to receive interim maintenance as aforementioned until final disposal of the case, which cannot be said to be on higher side. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perusing the impugned order and the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, I am of the view that the Family Court has not committed any illegality or infirmity or 5 jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the prayer made to quash the impugned order is refused. 9. However, the present revision is disposed of with the direction that the concerned Family Court is at liberty to conclude the proceedings under Section 125 of CrPC, preferably within a period of three months from today, if there is no any legal impediment. 10. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the concerned Family Court for necessary compliance and follow up action. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil