1 2025:CGHC:6674 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 165 of 2025 1 - Nishant Minj S/o Fuljens Minj Aged About 38 Years Caste- Uraon, R/o House No. 4, Pawar Buildcon, Opposite Chhattisgarh Engineering College, Dhanora, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Smt. Pushpika Lakda W/o Nishant Minj Aged About 30 Years Caste- Uraon, R/o Pando Para, Bisunpurkala, Ward No. 48, Kanya Parisar Road, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. MPS Bhatia, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 05/02/2025 1. The present Criminal Revision is filed by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the order dated 02.01.2025 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 204/2023 whereby allowing the application of the respondents for 2 grant of maintenance. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the Respondent is the wife of the Applicant and their marriage was solemnized on 28.12.2021 at Ambikapur, District- Surguja. That, because of regular ill treatment and harassment by the respondent upon the applicant and his parents the respondent has been causing cruelty on the applicant. That, she has deserted the Applicant without any reason and is living with her parents since 04.04.2023. The applicant made several requests and efforts to bring the respondents back to live with him; without any fruitful results. The non-applicant filed an Application dated 25.10.2023 before the learned Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, District-Surguja (C.G.) U/s. 125 of the Cr.P.C. 1973, praying for grant of a maintenance amount of Rs. 50,000/- per month claiming that, the applicant is having monthly income of Rs. 2,00,000/ The above application was registered as Misc. Cri. Case No. 204/2023 before the learned Judge, Family Court, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.). That, the applicant herein filed his reply dated 18.03.2024 to the application u/S 125 CrPC. In the reply the applicant specifically denied that, he has monthly income of Rs. 2,00,000/-. He also made it clear that, he gets Rs. 60,000/- to 70,000/- as salary per month. The applicant had also mentioned in his reply that, he has been putting efforts to keep the respondents with him. The applicant had also mentioned in his reply that, he has taken various loans including- i) personal loan of about Rs 9 lakhs for his marriage taken from State Bank of India, 3 Bhilai against which he is paying monthly installment of Rs. 18,492/-, ii) car loan of about Rs 11 lakhs for taken from State Bank of India, Bhilai against which he is paying monthly installment of Rs. 18,000/-, iii) personal loan of about Rs 1.75 lakhs taken from State Bank of India, Bhilai against which he is paying monthly installment of Rs. 6,292/- and iv) loan of Rs 5 lakhs for the marriage of sister of the respondent namely- Sujata Lakda from Urban Bank /Indian Railway against which he is paying monthly installment of Rs. 11,155/-. Thus the applicant has the liability of Rs. 53,946/- per month as installments of various loans. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is working as a Senior Loco Pilot in Indian Railways and is paying monthly installments of various loans around Rs. 50,000/-. He further contended that the order and finding of the learned Court below is contrary to law, evidence and facts of the case, therefore, it deserves to be set-aside. 4. In the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha 2021 AIR 569 SC, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered in detail with regard to amount of interim maintenance what should be the reasonable amount. Similar view has also been taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Rashmi Tiwari Vs. Sanjeev Tiwari 2019 Lawsuit (Chh) 977 in which, as per the reply of respondent/husband, he is working as a Librarian in Navodaya Vidyalaya, Kondagaon and his basic salary is Rs. 83,600/-, 4 whereas the petitioner/wife is house wife and has no source of income to maintain her livelihood. 5. The Learned Family Judge, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.) has passed the order dated 02.01.2025 in Misc. Criminal Case No. 204/2023 on the basis of compromise by and between the parties but there was no written compromise between the applicant and the respondent. Presuming that there was consensus in return the applicant is not getting anything as the respondent had lodged FIR in Crime No. 422023 in the Mahila Thana, Ambikapur, District-Sarguja, which is pending Criminal Case No. 5453/2023 before JMFC, Ambikapur, District-Sarguja. Even there is no attempt to compound in the criminal case. Thus, in the name of one-sided so called compromise the order impugned dated 02.01.2025 has been passed which is illegal. 6. Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, contentions of the counsel for the applicant this Court is of the considered opinion that the order dated 02.01.2025 passed by the learned Family Judge, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 204/2023 is per se illegal which deserves to be and is hereby set-aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Family Court to decide the application filed by the petitioner/wife under Section 125 of CrPC, in respect of grant of interim maintenance afresh. 7. Also, the petitioner herein- Mr. Nishant Minj is directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month interim maintenance to Respondent- Smt. 5 Pushpika Lakda till the disposal of Misc. Criminal Case No. 204/2023 before the learned Family Judge, Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.). 8. In view of the aforesaid observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima