1 2025:CGHC:56953 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1419 of 2025 1 - Monika Tandon W/o Shri Bharat Bhushan Tandon Aged About 29 Years R/o Borasi Colony, Near Railway Fatak, Durg, Tehsil And Distt.- Durg, C.G. 2 - Ankush S/o Shri Bharat Bhushan Tandon Aged About 9 Years Through Legal Guardian And Mother Monika Tandon, R/o Borasi Colony, Near Railway Fatak, Durg, Tehsil And Distt.- Durg, C.G. ... Applicants versus Bharat Bhushan Tandon S/o Lakhan Tandon Aged About 32 Years R/o Purani Basti, House No. 103, Ward No. - 05, Supela, Tehsil And Distt.- Durg, C.G. ---- Respondents For Applicants : Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.11.2025 1. Heard Ms. Ruchi Nagar, learned counsel appearing for the applicants. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 14.10.2025 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, District – Durg (C.G.) in Miscellaneous Cr. Case No. 1137/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicants. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the applicant No.1 and the respondent got married on 30.04.2015 at Village Tevra, Gunderdehi, Distt. Balod (C.G.) as per the Hindu rights and rituals. soon after the marriage the parties were residing at Supela, Bhilai, Distt. Durg and from the very beginning the respondent and his parents had treated RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 her with cruelty for the reason that she is not educated and has not brought enough dowry. That the respondent and his family had also pressurized her to abort her pregnancy while she was pregnant with applicant No.2. 4. When the applicant refused to do so the respondent and his family had beaten her and abused her with filthy language upon which she informed this incident to her parents then instead of reconciling, the respondent and his family threatened that if she does not oblige to them then they will not take her back to the matrimonial house. The applicant No. 2 was born on 12.03.2016 and when the information about the delivery of the applicant No.2 was given to the respondent then also, he did not come to visit them. That after few months of delivery the respondent brought back the applicants to the matrimonial house, but again they started to harass her. The respondent used to hot to come at night and if she would complaint about it the respondent used to beat her, and further he had failed to perform his matrimonial duties towards the applicant No.1. That she was constantly been harassed by the respondent and his family because she is not much educated. 5. Due to constant mental and physical harassment of the respondent, the applicants had no option but to reside with her parents, and even then, the respondent never tried to reconcile with her and never tried to meet the applicant No. 2, or to bring them back to the matrimonial house and also failed to maintain the applicants due to which they are at the stage of destitution and are unable to meet with their daily and monthly expenses of food, shelter and clothing, medical -expenses and 3 educational expenses of the applicant No. 2. The applicants have been deserted by the respondent for the aforesaid reasons and they are not allowing her to reside and live in the matrimonial house with them, and also the respondent has failed to perform his duty to maintain the wife and son. the applicant No. 01 had no option but to file an application U/s 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the learned trial court for grant of total- Rs. 15,000/-from the respondent. 6. The learned Family Court found that the applicant No.1 has not proved her case and the learned Family Court partially allowed the application and granted maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- per month in favor of applicant No. 2 and not for applicant No. 1 and thereby the learned Family Court passed impugned order. Hence, this revision. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the impugned order is arbitrary and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. The learned Family Court Judge completely ignored the fact that it is evident from the record and evidences that due to constant mental and physical harassment of the respondent, the petitioners were residing separately, which is itself a sufficient cause to live separately. Therefore, the order of the Family Court is liable to be set-aside. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 9. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants, and from the perusal of the order of the Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, it transpires that after hearing all the statements 4 of the witnesses and perusing the evidence available on record, the learned Family Court has passed the impugned order, and there is no any illegality and infirmity while passing the same which requires interference by this Court. 10. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 11. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar