1 2025:CGHC:57206 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3511 of 2025 Rajendro Kumar Nag S/o Sukhchand Nag Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Korraplant, Post And P.S. Farasgaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh At Present R/o Old Police Superintendent Bangla, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Smt. Sonbati Nag W/o Rajendro Kumar Nag Aged About 32 Years R/o R.E.S. Colony, Kondagaon, P.S. And District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 2 - Ku. Bhumija Nag D/o Rajendro Kumar Nag Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Sonbati Nag, R/o R.E.S. Colony, Kondagaon, P.S. And District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chandrasen Chouhan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 25/11/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 being aggrieved by the order dated 23.02.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Criminal Revision No. 407/2025 arising out of impugned order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the learned Family Court Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon C.G. in Misc. Criminal Case No. 33/2022 whereby this Hon'ble Court has dismissed the criminal revision by the petitioner/applicant. 2. Relevant facts leading to disposal of this petition are that on 25.05.2014, the petitioner had solemnized marriage along with respondent no. 1 according to Hindu custom at Village Sonabeda Plantpara, District- Kondagaon C.G., since then the respondent no. 1 was living with the applicant as wife at her matrimonial house and from their wedlock, respondent no. 2 was born. As per allegation made by the respondent no. 1 is that after some time of the marriage, the petitoner 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 had also demanded dowry with cruel from the respondent no. 1, and hence, respondent no. 1 left at her matrimonial house and started residing with her daughter at her parental house. 3 3. Respondent no. 1 has no source of income for survival and the petitioner is working as trade constable (Mochi) and on account of his work, he obtain an amount of Rs. 30,000- Rs. 35,000/- per month and also having agricultural land area 22 acre from which he get Rs. 2,00,000/- annually. 4. The learned Family Court has passed the order dated 31.01.2025, whereby allowed the interim maintenance application of the respondents and directed the petitioner to pay the maintenance amount of Rs. 10,000/- per month (Rs. 5000/- for respondent no. 1 and Rs. 5000/- for respondent no. 2). Being aggrieved by this order, the applicant filed criminal revision no. 407/2025 before this Court which has been dismissed vide order dated 28.03.2025. Hence, this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the impugned order passed by learned the Family Court is completely illegal, erroneous, arbitrary, and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. He further contended that the applicant is taking care to the respondent no. 2 for her education and to pay school fee, medical, cloth etc. of Rs. 2400/-per month, and also to pay financed personal loan amount of Rs. 12,980/- per month, and to pay amount of Rs.1,965/- for life insurance, and Rs. 15,472/- for life insurance per month, and after marriage, the applicant has also done Post Graduate of M.A. and B.Ed. education during from year 2015 to 2020 through his personal financed loan amount of Rs. 6,80,000/- and also given personal 4 loan amount of Rs. 1,36,000/- and to pay installment of Rs. 4,469/- per months and has also expenses amount of Rs. 5,000/- for rental house per month and like this the applicant has expended total amount of Rs. 26,814/- per month from his salary. He further contended that in the year 2018, respondent no.1 was withdrawal amount of Rs. 1,18,398/- from the applicant's account bank without any information given to him and she is working as Secretary in Water Shed Agricultural Department and on account of her work, she has obtained amount of Rs.7,000/-per month per month and hence, she has able to manage herself for livelihood. It is further argued that the learned Family Court has failed to see that the applicant has never acted with the respondent and the applicant has always try to manage his matrimonial life, but the respondent no. 1 has refused to live with applicant together and hence, maintenance is liable to be set-aside. The learned Family Court has failed to see that the respondents have failed to prove the income of applicant and did not produce any document with regard to income of the applicant, therefore, maintenance awarded Rs. 10,000/- is liable to be quashed. It is therefore prayed that this Court may kindly be allowed criminal revision and set-aside impugned order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh in Misc. Criminal Case No. 33/2022, in the interest of justice. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the 5 impugned order available on record with utmost circumspection. 7. Considering the facts of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and from perusal of the record, it is evident that after taking into consideration, the learned Family Court has granted interim maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- per month (Rs.5,000/- for respondent No.1 and Rs.5,000/- to respondent No.2). From perusal of the record of the trial Court, it transpires that respondent No.1/wife has no source of income, she is residing in her parental home with her minor daughter/respondent No 2 and she is struggling to support here. hence, the Family Court granted the interim maintenance to the non-applicants/respondents under Section 125 of CrPC, applicant is husband of the respondent No.1 and father of respondent No.2, has to pay the said interim maintenance amount. 8. This Court vide its order dated 28.03.2025 dismissed the Criminal Revision bearing CRR No. 407 of 2025 holding that on perusal of the order under challenge, it is evident that the learned Family Court has discussed the factors while arriving at a finding is just and proper. From perusal of the same, it is evident that the applicant and respondent No.1 were married according to their customs and it is alleged that due to the harassment by the applicant, respondent No.1 had to reside separately. Thereafter, she is facing great hardships and is unable to maintain herself and her minor child. 9. The respondents have been living separately from the applicant 6 after they were deserted and hence, the learned Family Court has rightly determined the amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondents, therefore, in the opinion of this Court that there is no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No.33/2022. 10. Section 403 of BNSS, 2023 provides as under: “403. Court not to alter judgment.- Save as otherwise provided by this Sanita or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court, when it has signed its judgment or final order disposing of a case, shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error.” 11. As per Section 403 of BNSS, 2023 the Court cannot alter or review its judgment except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error. 12. In view of the above, the present petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima