1 2025:CGHC:42398 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1031 of 2025 1 - Smt. Vinita Patel W/o Arjun Patel Aged About 25 Years R/o Koni, P.S. Koni, Tahsil And District-Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ku. Riya Patel D/o Arjun Patel Aged About 4 Years (Minor) Through Guardian Mother Smt. Vinita Patel R/o Koni, P.S. Koni, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus Arjun Patel S/o Sarman Patel Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Khajuhakala, P.S. And Tahsil Gudh, District- Riwa (M.P.) ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Sourabh Sonwani, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. Sourabh Sonwani, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 24.07.2025 passed by the learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 563/2024, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicants, and ordered the respondent that he has to pay total Rs. 1,500/- per month to the applicant No.1 and Rs. 500/- per month to the applicant No.2 as maintenance. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the applicant filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance before the learned Family Court, Bilaspur which has been registered the Misc. Criminal RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Case No. 563/2024. As per the case of applicant that the marriage was solemnized between the parties on 16.05.2015 in accordance with social customs in village Koni, Police Station Koni, Tehsil and District Bilaspur, (C.G.). A daughter i.e. applicant No. 02 was born due to wedlock of the applicant and respondent and at present applicant No. 2 resides with applicant No. 1. The applicant No. 01 came to her maternal house during Holi, when she started having severe pain in her stomach, which was treated by her mother, then it was found that applicant No. 01 had a big wound in her stomach. Applicant No. 01 mother continuously got her treated in government and private hospitals and after a few days the respondent and his family came to their home/ in-laws' house with applicant No. 01. respondent and his family members were continuously torture and temper to the applicant No. 1. On 02.03.2023, when applicant No. 01 and respondent were coming to Bilaspur, the respondent's family members got the respondent off the train and applicant No. 01 was sent to Bilaspur alone, since then applicant No. 01 is residing in her maternal home. The respondent does farming, from which he earns about 04 to 05 lakh rupees annually and applicant No. 01 is a housewife woman who does not have any source of income. 4. The respondent herein has filed the reply to the said application and has denied the averments raised by the applicants. The learned Family Court has recorded the statement of the parties. The witnesses were examined before the learned Family Court including the applicant and the respondent. The learned Family Court by passing the impugned order, has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicants, and ordered the respondent that he has to pay total Rs. 1,500/- per month to the applicant No.1 and Rs. 500/- per month to the applicant No.2 as maintenance. Hence, this revision. 3 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the impugned order is contrary to the facts, law and circumstances of this case. The learned Family Court has failed to appreciate that the respondent does farming, from which he earns about 04 to 05 lakh rupees annually and applicant No. 01 is a housewife woman who does not have any source of income, but despite the said fact the learned Family Court has awarded only a total amount of maintenance Rs. 2,000/- to the applicants which is very low and deserves to be enhanced. Therefore, the impugned order is contrary to the facts, and the same is liable to be modified. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, 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 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. 8. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 9. 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