1 2025:CGHC:34964 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 219 of 2023 Smt. Bhagwati Koshley W/o Gendram Koshley Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Dodki, Thana And Tahsil Bilha, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Gendram Koshley S/o Anjore Das Koshley Aged About 28 Years R/o Hemunagar, Near Over Bridge, Police Station Torwa, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sahu, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sahu, learned cousnel, appearing for the applicant. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer: “It is therefore, prayed that the Hon’ble Court to please to allow Criminal Revision and modify/enhanced of maintenance amount of the petitioner from impugned order dated 17.01.2023 passed by the learned Family Court Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in M.J.C. Case No. 177/2018, in the ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.24 11:09:29 +0530 2 interest of justice. Any other relief may also be granted in the favour of petitioner as may deem fit by the Hon’ble Court.” 3. Facts of the case are that the applicant had filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Family Court, seeking grant of maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month from the respondent. The applicant had solemnized marriage with the respondent on 16.04.2013 according to Hindu rites, rituals, and customs. After a few days of marriage, the respondent started beating the applicant and using filthy language towards her, as the respondent was having an illegal relationship with another woman. The present applicant is working as an Anganwadi Worker in Village Parsad, District Bilaspur (C.G.), and the respondent is posted at Brijrajnagar, Raigarh, working as a Loco Pilot in the Railways. Due to his illegal relationship with another woman, the respondent forcefully wanted a divorce from the applicant. The respondent earns Rs. 84,093/- per month, while the applicant earns only Rs. 6,500/- per month. 4. After service of notice upon the respondent, the respondent filed a written statement denying all the averments pleaded in the application. 5. Learned Family Court framed issues after the pleadings of both parties and recorded evidence under the provisions of Order 18 Rule 4 of the CPC, as on record. The applicant submitted her statement, and the respondent denied the contentions raised by the applicant. The learned Family Court, after hearing both parties, granted maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- per month vide order dated 17.01.2022, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case, which has dissatisfied the applicant. The impugned order is illegal, erroneous, and contrary to law. 3 Hence, this revision is filed. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. The applicant had to leave her matrimonial house due to the cruelty inflicted by the respondent, and she has suffered both mentally and physically. He submits that the respondent is working in the South East Central Railway, Bilaspur Division, as a Loco Pilot and receives a salary of Rs. 84,093/- per month from the said department. The learned Family Court has ignored these facts and granted only Rs. 5,000/- per month as maintenance. A copy of the salary slip for February 2022 is filed herewith as Annexure P/2. Hence, the maintenance amount is liable to be enhanced. He further submits that the applicant has no independent means of income apart from her work as an Anganwadi Worker, and it is very difficult for her to meet her expenses. Hence, the maintenance amount is liable to be enhanced. Learned Family Court has ignored the fact that the applicant left her matrimonial house due to the illegal acts and cruelty committed by the respondent. Learned Family Court overlooked the fact that the respondent is working in the Railway Department and earns approximately Rs. 85,000/- per month, as evidenced by Annexure P/2, and that he has an illicit relationship with another woman. He submits that learned Family Court committed an error in appreciating the evidence on record regarding the income of the respondent and has wrongly given findings on his source of income. Therefore, the maintenance amount is liable to be enhanced. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 4 8. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court concerned after considering all the documents and evidence adduced by the parties has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant and has awarded maintenance of Rs. 5000/- to the applicant, observing the income, social and economic status of both the parties and current price index, which cannot be said to be on lower side. 9. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perusing the impugned order and the finding recorded by the learned Family Court, I am of the view that the learned Family Court has not committed any illegality or infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 10. Accordingly, the criminal revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek