1 2025:CGHC:57317 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 565 of 2022 Kamal Parakh S/o Fulchand Parakh, Aged About 26 Years R/o Gurudev Collection Madhuchowk, Station Road, Balod, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1. Smt. Punam Parakh W/o Kamal Jparakh, Aged About 26 Years R/o Pankaj Provision Store, Behind Jain Bhawan, Charoda, BMY, Tahsil Patan, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2. Abhigya Parakh D/o Kamal Parakh Aged About 1 Years Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Punam Parakh, R/o Pankaj Provision Store, Behind Jain Bhawan, Charoda, Bmy, Tahsil Patan, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3. Abhishree Parakh D/o Kamal Parakh, Aged About 1 Years Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Punam Parakh, R/o Pankaj Provision Store, Behind Jain Bhawan, Charoda, Bmy, Tahsil Patan, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents 0 For Applicant : Ms. Akanksha Jain, Advocate.. For Respondents : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Akanksha Jain, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the following ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.11.27 10:19:11 +0530 2 prayer: “It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the application and set aside the order dated 04.05.2022 passed by Learned Third Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.), in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the wife of the applicant filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the Court of the Third Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg. According to the application, the marriage between the parties was performed on 24.06.2011 according to Hindu rites and customs. After the marriage, the applicant and his relatives started torturing her, stating that the articles given in the marriage were of substandard quality. Even during her pregnancy, she was forced to perform heavy household work. Her sister- in-law threw footwear into her meal. Because of the ill-treatment, she suffered a miscarriage during her first pregnancy. When she conceived a second time, she was sent to her parental home against her wishes. After the delivery, when she returned to her matrimonial home, the applicant used to assault her and utter obscene words against her. On 23.01.2014, she lodged a report with the police, upon which a criminal case under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. was registered. She also filed a complaint under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in which the learned JMFC granted her Rs. 3,000/- per month as maintenance. It is also the case of the wife that the husband is earning Rs. 3,50,000/- per month from the cloth business, whereas she has no source of income. She has sought an amount of Rs. 30,000/- per month as maintenance. 4. The applicant/husband filed his reply denying all the allegations made in 3 the application. The reply states that after the delivery, the behaviour of the wife became abnormal. She was not discharging her household duties and used to sleep in her room the entire day. She frequently insisted on visiting her parental home. She also levelled false allegations against the applicant’s sister, who is living a saintly life. The wife is residing at her parental home of her own free will. When the applicant convened a community meeting, the wife’s father threatened him. It is his case that the wife has filed false complaints and proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act. The applicant further stated that he earns only Rs. 25,000/-–30,000/- per month from the joint Hindu family business. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the maintenance application. 5. The husband and wife submitted their examination-in-chief by way of afÏdavits and were cross-examined by the opposite party before the Court. 6. After hearing both parties, the learned Family Court awarded maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month (Rs. 7,000/- for the applicant/wife and Rs. 8,000/- for the two minor children) vide order dated 04.05.2022. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned Family Court , after noting that the applicant’s income is between Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- per month from the joint Hindu family business, has erred in awarding monthly maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- to the wife and minor children, which is extremely excessive. He also submits that the learned Family Court has committed an illegality in holding the applicant liable for maintenance when the husband has neither neglected nor refused to maintain the wife, and the wife is residing in her parental home of her own free will. Hence, the award of maintenance in favour of the wife is contrary to the provisions of law. He further submits that the wife is already receiving Rs. 3,000/- per month as maintenance under the 4 provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Therefore, the present award of maintenance is excessively high and unjustified. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submission and prayers made by learned counsel for the applicant. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment of the learned Family Court. 10. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record and also considering the price index and medical expenses, total amount awarded to the respondents cannot be said to be shockingly on higher side warranting interference by this Court in the present revision petition. 11. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 12. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit the original record to the concerned Family Court within a week from today for necessary information and follow up action. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek