1 2025:CGHC:53570 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1325 of 2025 Vinit Kumar Jain S/o Shri Nemichand Jain Aged About 36 Years R/o Qr. No. N.D. 71, Cspgcl Colony Korba (East) Tahsil And Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus Smt. Lovely Sagar W/o Shri Vinit Jain Aged About 36 Years R/o Qr. No. 1/c Secl Russian Colony Korba, Tahsil And Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. Aadhar No. 235706590825, Mob. No. 9981810063 ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Titra Ram Patel, Advocate. For Non-applicant(s) : None Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03 /11/2025 1. Heard Mr. Titra Ram Patel, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The applicant has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 06.08.2024 passed by learned Principle Judge, Family Court Korba, District – Korba (C.G.) in Case No.21/2024, whereby learned Family Court has granted Rs. 12000/- per month to Non- applicant as interim maintenance in the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 3. The brief facts, as emerging from the record, are that it is an admitted position that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 07.10.2020. The Non-applicant/wife follows Christian religion whereas the applicant/husband belongs to Jain religion. According to the Non-applicant, after marriage the applicant did not take her to the matrimonial home and she continued to live with her parents. She alleged that the applicant and his parents pressurized her to renounce her Christian faith and adopt Jain religion, which caused her mental agony. It was further stated that she has no source of income and is suffering from medical ailments like back pain and chest pain, for which she spends ₹20,000–₹25,000/- per month. On these grounds, she sought interim maintenance of ₹45,000/- per month. 4. The applicant/husband, in his reply, denied all the allegations and stated that he had accepted the Non-applicant as his wife and taken her home, where customary post-marriage rituals were performed. He alleged that the she herself left the matrimonial home and refused to accompany him to Bengaluru, where he is employed as an engineer in PVR Inox Cinema, drawing a monthly salary of ₹85,940/-. He contended that he has heavy personal expenses, including rent, medical and household expenditure, and hence, he is not in a financial position to pay the amount claimed. He further submitted that the non-applicant voluntarily chose to live separately without any sufÏcient reason and is, therefore, not entitled to maintenance. 3 5. After considering the rival pleadings and material placed on record, the learned Family Court observed that the fact of marriage between the parties is undisputed. Both sides have levelled allegations of cruelty against each other, which can be decided only after recording of evidence during trial. The Family Court found that the Non-applicant/wife is not gainfully employed, while the applicant has admitted his employment as an engineer at PVR Inox, Bengaluru, with a monthly income of ₹85,940/-. Accordingly, the learned Family Court held that granting ₹12,000/- per month as interim maintenance would be just and reasonable. Hence, the applicant was directed to pay ₹12,000/- per month to the non- applicant till final disposal of the main case. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is wholly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the settled principles of law. The applicant submits that the maintenance proceedings have been initiated by the non- applicant under the undue influence and pressure of her family members, whose intentions towards the applicant have never been bona fide. The applicant has always shown willingness to resume marital life with the non-applicant by overlooking all previous disputes, however, the non-applicant, despite being well-educated and capable of maintaining herself, has refused to live with the applicant without any sufÏcient or justifiable reason. The conduct of the non-applicant and her family members towards the applicant has been cruel in nature. It is further submitted that the applicant is presently employed as an Engineer at Bengaluru and, therefore, it is 4 not feasible for him to appear before the learned Family Court on each and every date of hearing. The applicant has also filed a petition for divorce before the learned Family Court, which is still pending consideration. Hence, the non-applicant, having voluntarily chosen to live separately without any reasonable cause, is not entitled to claim any maintenance from the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with criminal revision. 8. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court has duly considered the pleadings and material placed on record and passed a well-reasoned order granting interim maintenance of ₹12,000/- per month to non-applicant, holding the same to be just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Considering these circumstances, the Court held that the non- applicant is entitled to receive interim maintenance as aforementioned until final disposal of the case, which cannot be said to be on higher side. 9. 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 jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 10. Accordingly, the prayer made to quash the impugned order is refused. 5 11. 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. 12. 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 Kunal