Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 53934 (CHH)

SMT. USHA YADAV v. SANT KUMAR YADAV

CRR/191/2025 · 2025-02-06

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:7027 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 191 of 2025 1 - Smt. Usha Yadav W/o Sant Kumar Yadav Aged About 55 Years Caste- Yadav, R/o Village- Naila, Near Juna Talab, Ward No. 04, Police Station And Tahsil- Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Sant Kumar Yadav S/o Sevak Ram Yadav Aged About 57 Years Caste- Yadav, R/o Village- Naila, Near Juna Talab, Ward No. 04, Police Station And Tahsil - Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Parasmani Shriwas, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 07/02/2025 1. The present Criminal Revision is filed by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the order dated 04.01.2025 passed by Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Janjgir, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal 2 Case No. 99/2023 whereby petitioner’s application filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance has been partly allowed. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the petitioner is a married wife of the respondent, their marriage was solemnized in the year 1981 at Village-Barpali, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) as per Hindu rites and customs, after solemnizing the marriage ceremony. After spending about two months peacefully of their married life, respondent as well as his family members have started torturing the petitioner for demand of dowry. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the learned Family Court has not seen the facts and circumstances of the case and passed erroneous order without applying the judicial mind whereas few amount has been granted as maintenance. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. From perusal of record it is crystal clear that the applicant and the non-applicant got married to each other in the year 1981 according to Hindu customs. It is admitted fact that the non- applicant is working as Peon in the Office of Collector and is earning Rs. 46000/- per month. The Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Janjgir, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) vide its order dated 04.01.2025 has awarded Rs. 5000/- per month as maintenance to the applicant. 6. The object of maintenance proceedings is not to punish a person for his past neglect, but to prevent vagrancy and destitution of a deserted wife by providing her food, clothing and shelter by speedy remedy. Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is a measure of a social justice and is specially enacted to protect women and children. It also falls within the constitutional sweep of Article 15(3), reinforced by Article 39 of the Constitution of India. 7. Therefore, considering facts of the case and looking to the the price index which is prevailing in the society and hike in value of 3 the commodities and nature of job of the respondent, it is directed that the respondent shall pay maintenance of Rs.6,500/- per month to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the present Criminal Revision is partly allowed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima