1 2025:CGHC:36487 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 190 of 2024 Rameshwar Singh Rajput S/o Shri Bhikham Singh Rajput Aged About 35 Years Permanent R/o Village - Bhimpuri Tahsil Khairagarh, District - Rajnandgaon (now Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai), Chhattisgarh. Presently House of Binda Sahu Baghera Road, Urla Turn Gaya Nagar, Ward No. 04, Durg, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus Smt. Ritu (Hritu) Rajput W/o Rameshwar Singh Rajput Aged About 26 Years D/o Omprakash Singh Chandel, R/o Ajad Nagar Ward No. 11 Ravanbhata Tahsil And Distt - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. U.N.S. Deo, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, counsel, appearing for the applicant as well as Mr. U.N.S. Deo, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer: “ It is, therefore, prayed that the Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned Judgment dated 14.12.2023 (Annexure A/01) passed ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.29 19:34:32 +0530 2 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 432/2021, in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that applicant is the husband of the respondent, and their marriage was solemnized according to Hindu rites on 07.05.2017 at Raipur (C.G.). The respondent herein filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of maintenance on 13.08.2021 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 432/2021 against the applicant. It was contended in the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. that after the marriage, the parties resided at Village Bhimpuri. After about 8 to 9 months, the applicant started residing in Gaya, Bihar, and later at Durg, without the consent of his wife. It was further alleged in the application that the husband committed cruelty by assaulting and threatening the wife. The wife lodged a complaint at the Mahila Thana on 05.06.2021. During counseling, the husband refused to take the wife back. In the application, the wife demanded maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- per month from her husband. 4. The applicant submitted his reply before the Family Court, denying all allegations. It was stated in the reply that the respondent is suffering from epilepsy (Mirgi), and therefore he kept the wife with his parents. Further, due to lack of income, he worked in Durg. It was also stated that the wife refused to stay in a joint family and is residing separately without any sufficient reason. The applicant further submitted that the Family Court, Rajnandgaon (Link Court: Khairagarh), granted a decree of divorce in his favor by judgment dated 06.01.2022 in Civil Suit No. 14A/2019. The wife has not challenged the said judgment before any Court. 5. Before the Trial Court, the respondent examined herself as PW-01, 3 Ganga Bai as PW-02, and Anjni Singh as PW-03. The husband was examined as DW-01. 6. The Family Court allowed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and granted maintenance of Rs. 7,000/- per month to the respondent from the applicant, along with Rs. 2,000/- as one-time legal expenses. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case and against the settled principles of law. He submits that learned Family Court passed the impugned order without properly considering the provisions of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the wife is suffering from epilepsy (Mirgi), and therefore, the husband had kept her with his parents for proper care. He further submits that the learned Family Court granted Rs. 7,000/- per month as maintenance without considering the actual income of the husband. The husband is working as a helper and earns only Rs. 4,000–5,000/- per month. Hence, the order passed by the Family Court is not sustainable. He also submits that learned Family Court, Rajnandgaon (Link Court: Khairagarh), had already granted a decree of divorce in favour of the husband by judgment dated 06.01.2022 in Civil Suit No. 14A/2019. The wife has not challenged the said judgment before any Court, and it has attained finality. Learned Family Court failed to consider the statement of the husband and granted maintenance solely on the basis of the statement of the wife, which is unjust and improper. The amount of maintenance granted by the Family Court is on the higher side. The husband does not have sufficient income to pay Rs. 7,000/- per month as maintenance. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent 4 opposes the prayers and submissions 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 respondent 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. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek