1 2025:CGHC:36847 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 195 of 2024 Gorakhnath Yadav S/o Shivnandan Yadav Aged About 41 Years Caste - Aahir, Occupation - Police Constable, Resident of Village Tendua, Police Station Patna, Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.), Present R/o Police Line Police Station - Balrampur, District Balrampur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Ku. Priya D/o Gorakhnath Yadav Aged About 16 Years (Minor), Representing Through Her Natural Guardian - Smt. Janki Yadav, W/o Gorakhnath Yadav, R/o Village Akharadand, Police Station - Khadgava, District - Koriya (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Rohitashva Singh, counsel, appearing for the applicant. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer: “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside impugned order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Judge Family Court Manendragarh District Koriya in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 162/2021, in the interest of justice.” ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.29 19:34:51 +0530 2 3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent preferred an application under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh, District Koriya (C.G.), seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount from Rs. 2,500/- to Rs. 15,000/- per month, to be paid by the applicant. As per the pleadings made by the respondent, an earlier order dated 07.06.2019 was passed under Section 127 of Cr.P.C., whereby maintenance of Rs. 2,500/- per month was awarded, which was claimed to be on the lower side and meager. The respondent, therefore, sought an enhancement to Rs. 10,000/- per month. Prior to this, on 08.11.2016, learned Family Court had granted maintenance of Rs. 2,000/- per month to the respondent. The respondent further pleaded that she is studying in Class 11th at Odia Higher Secondary School, Godaripara, Chirmiri, and her educational expenses exceed Rs. 7,000/- per month. The earlier granted maintenance amount was insufficient. It was further stated that the applicant is working as a constable and earning Rs. 62,000/- per month. Hence, the respondent prayed for enhancement of maintenance to Rs. 15,000/- per month from the existing Rs. 2,500/-. 4. The applicant filed his written statement and pleaded that the respondent is demanding an excessive maintenance amount. He stated that the respondent had not submitted any receipts for educational expenses and that the Government provides free education to all OBC, SC, and ST girl students. He further contended that his actual salary is Rs. 32,000/- per month, from which Rs. 17,000/- is deducted monthly. Additionally, his son is undergoing medical treatment, and both his wife and son are dependent on him. Therefore, he prayed for dismissal of the respondent’s application. 5. After hearing submissions from both parties, the learned Family Court, by 3 order dated 15.12.2023, awarded a maintenance amount of Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order, the learned Family Court awarded maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondent without there being any substantive material evidence on record. Learned Family Court erred in computing the maintenance amount, especially when the respondent is an illegitimate child and her mother possesses agricultural land and other sources of income. He further submits that learned Family Court failed to appreciate that the respondent and her mother had previously filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which was dismissed on the ground of non- establishment of the relationship between the applicant and respondent as husband-wife and father-daughter. The revision against the said dismissal was also rejected by the Hon’ble High Court, though liberty was granted to file a civil suit seeking declaration of legal status as wife and daughter. Despite this, the learned Family Court has treated Ku. Priya as the illegitimate child of the applicant. He further submits that learned Family Court failed to consider that the respondent had earlier approached the Family Court under Section 125 Cr.P.C., where by order dated 08.11.2016, Rs. 2,000/- per month was awarded. Subsequently, on 07.06.2019, under Section 127 Cr.P.C., the amount was enhanced to Rs. 2,500/- per month. Once the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been rejected, there is no provision to file the same again. He further submits that learned Family Court also failed to consider that the respondent had attained majority at the time of the final order. As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in Abhilasha v. Prakash and Others, (2021) 13 SCC 99, a major unmarried daughter can claim maintenance from her father, but the proper remedy lies under Section 4 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. Therefore, Section 125 Cr.P.C. is not applicable in the present case. He also submits that learned Family Court failed to consider that the applicant is also responsible for maintaining his wife, four children, and aged parents. Furthermore, the respondent’s mother has her own source of income, which has not been considered by the Court. 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 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. 9. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek