1 2025:CGHC:30229 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 196 of 2018 Naresh Rajwade S/o Late Sundar Sai Rajwade Aged About 40 Years Caste- Rajwar, Occupation - Service (Posted in SECL, Charcha Colliery), R/o Village - Jampara, Baikunthpur, Police Station And Tahsil - Baikunthpur, Korea, Presently Resided At - Kharwat, Baikunthpur, Police Station - Charcha, Tahsil - Baikunthpur, District - Korea, Chhattisgarh. … Applicant versus 1. Smt. Urmila Rajwade W/o Shri Naresh Rajwade Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Jampara, Baikunthpur, Police Station And Tehsil - Baikunthpur, Korea, Presently Resided At Village - Girjapur, Police Station - Patna, Tahsil - Baikunthpur, District- Korea, Chhattisgarh. 2. Aman Rajwade S/o Shri Naresh Rajwade Aged About 8 Years Minor, Through His Natural Guardian i.e. Mother Urmila Rajwade, R/o Girjapur, Police Station - Patna, District - Korea, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.05 14:49:25 +0530 2 following prayer: “It is therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 23.01.2018, passed by the learned Family Court, in Misc. Cr. Case No. 95/2016, in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case that the marriage of respondent No. 1 and the applicant was solemnized according to Hindu customs twelve years ago. Out of their wedlock, two sons, Umesh (aged 10 years) and Aman (Respondent No. 2, aged 7 years), were born. The respondents, being the wife and minor son, filed an application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, before the learned Family Court seeking maintenance of Rs. 8,000 per month for respondent No. 1 and Rs. 3,000 per month for respondent No. 2 from the applicant. They claimed that the applicant is employed with SECL, Charcha Colliery, earning a monthly salary of Rs. 30,000/- to 35,000/-, and also possesses sufficient agricultural land. 4. The applicant filed a reply to the application, denying all the contentions raised by the respondents. 5. The learned Family Court, vide its order dated 25.01.2018, allowed the application and directed the applicant to pay a total maintenance of Rs. 6,000/- per month (Rs. 4,000 per month to respondent No. 1 and Rs. 2,000 per month to Respondent No. 2). 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order passed by 3 the learned Family Court is illegal, erroneous, and contrary to the law as well as the facts available on record. Learned Family Court, without properly appreciating the evidence and material available on record, passed the impugned order. He submits that learned Family Court failed to appreciate that the respondents did not prove sufficient grounds to reside separately from the applicant, and therefore, as per the proviso to Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., respondent No. 1 is not entitled to maintenance. He further submtis that learned Family Court also failed to consider that the maintenance amount awarded in favour of the respondents is on the higher side, considering the salary and other social liabilities of the applicant. Learned Family Court further failed to appreciate that, upon considering the entire material available on record, the respondents are not entitled to maintenance. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the judgment of the learned Family Court. 8. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 9. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek