1 2025:CGHC:7770 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 216 of 2025 1 - Sudha Baghel W/o Shri Ramji Baghel Aged About 51 Years R/o Block 11/a, Street-18, Sector-2, Bhilai Nagar, Tah. And Distt.- Durg (C.G.), 490001 2 - Manisha Baghel D/o Shri Ramji Baghel Aged About 25 Years R/o Block 11/a, Street-18, Sector-2, Bhilai Nagar, Tah. And Distt.- Durg (C.G.), 490001 3 - Rishabh Baghel S/o Shri Ramji Baghel, Aged About 17 Years 6 Months, (Minor- Represented Through Natural Guardian Mother- Applicant No. 1), R/o Block 11/a, Street-18, Sector-2, Bhilai Nagar, Tah. And Distt.- Durg (C.G.), 490001 ...Applicant(s) versus 1 - Shri Ramji Baghel S/o Nemdas Baghel Aged About 55 Years R/o- Vill. Renhachi, Post- Chandanbirhi Via Arjunda, Tah.- Gunderdehi, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 491225. Alternate Address- Upper Division Teacher, Class Ii, Govt. High School, Vill. Gandamor, Block Nawagarh, Distt.- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Piyush Bhoi on behalf of Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 13/02/2025 1. The present Criminal revision is filed by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act read with Section 438/442 of the BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 26.12.2024 passed in 2 Case No. 682/2024 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, in which the non-applicant has been directed to pay Rs. 8000/- per month to the applicant no. 1 as interim maintenance and has rejected the application preferred by applicant no. 2 and 3 who are unmarried daughter and son of non-applicant. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the marriage of the applicant no. 1 and the respondent was solemnized on 09.05.1997 according to hindu rites and customs at Sector 6 Bhilai, District-Durg (C.G.). the applicant no. 2 was born from their wedlock on 26.07.1999 and at present she is a student of M.A. in Economics in Durg Science and Arts College. She is unmarried and is staying with her mother and has no source of income. The applicant no. 3 was born on 24.10.2006 and is a student of Class XII in Private English Medium School, viz. Shri Narayan Guru Vidya Bhavan, Sector-4, Bhilai, Durg and he is unmarried and staying with the mother and has no source of income. The applicant no. 1 and the respondent is living separately since 2007 for about 16 years and they are not legally divorced. The respondent is a government employee working in Govt. High School and is getting total salary of Rs. 71,293/- per month and not paying any maintenance to the applicants. 3. After considering the application and reply filed by both the parties and the evidence adduced by both the parties, the learned family Court vide its order dated 26.12.2024 (Annexure A-1) granted amount of Rs. 8,000/- per month has been awarded to the 3 applicants by the learned Family Court, hence this revision is being filed for enhancement of interim maintenance amount. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that while granting amount of interim maintenance, the learned Family Court has not considered the income of the respondent properly and granted less maintenance to the applicants. The learned Family Court has overlooked the fact that the two children (applicant No.2 & 3) are studying and are unemployed having no source of income and therefore, maintenance of Rs.8,000/- is very lower side, which is liable to be enhanced. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Perusal of record shows that it is crystal clear that applicant no. 1 is legally wedded wife of the respondent and applicant no. 2 and 3 are children of the respondent. It is also admitted fact that the respondent is government teacher and is earning Rs. 65,605/- per month. 7. Considering the facts of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the applicants and from perusal of the record, it is evident that after taking into consideration, the learned Family Court has granted interim maintenance amount of Rs.8,000/- per month to the applicant. 4 8. From perusal of the record of the trial Court, it transpires that applicant No.1/wife has no source of income, she is residing separately with her minor son and unmarried daughter/applicants No.2 & 3 and she is struggling to support herself, hence, the Family Court granted the interim maintenance to the applicants under Section 125 of CrPC. The non-applicant is husband of applicant No.1 and father of applicants No.2 & 3, therefore it is his liability to maintain his wife and children. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case and looking to the the price index which is prevailing in the society and hike in value of the commodities and nature of job of the respondent, it is directed that the respondent shall pay interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month to the applicants instead of Rs. 8,000/-. 9. Accordingly, the revision is partly allowed and stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima