1 2025:CGHC:8869 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 247 of 2025 1 - Lokeshwari @ Parmeshwari, W/o Laxmikant Joshi aged about 29 years, R/o Village Kodwa, P.S. and Tahsil Saza, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh, through Kriparam Joshi, Village Jheet, Tahsil Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Yash Joshi S/o Laxmikant, aged about 7 years, legal guardian Applicant No. 1 Mother Lokeshwari @ Parmeshwari, R/o Village Kodwa, P.S. and Tahsil Saza, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh, through Kriparam Joshi, Village Jheet, Tahsil Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ayush Joshi S/o Laxmikant Joshi, aged about 4 years, legal guardian Applicant No. 1 Mother Lokeshwari @ Parmeshwari, R/o Village Kodwa, P.S. and Tahsil Saza, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh, through Kriparam Joshi, Village Jheet, Tahsil Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners Versus Laxmikant Joshi S/o Bhushan Prasad Joshi, aged about 31 years, R/o Village Kodwa, P.S. and Tahsil Saza, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause-title has been taken from Case Information System) Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate. Respondent : None. 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 20/02/2025 1. The instant criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 03/01/2025 passed by the Third Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, C.G. in MCC No. 303/2022 whereby the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants/petitioners have been partly allowed and each of the applicants have been awarded Rs.1000/- as maintenance i.e., total amount of Rs. 3000/-. Hence this revision for enhancement of the amount of maintenance. 2. The brief facts of this case are that the applicant No. 1 is the wife of non- applicant and applicants No. 2 & 3 are the children of non-applicant/respondent and as per the case of the applicants, from the gift given at the time of marriage between the applicant No. 1 and the non-applicant/respondent and his family were not happy and after the birth of applicant No. 2/Yash the behaviour of the family members of the non-applicant were changed and they used to compel the applicant No. 1 to bring Rs. 8,000-Rs. 10,000/- monthly from her parents so that they can meet their household expenses, and also non-applicant/husband and his family members put the pressure on the applicant No. 1 and thereafter the father of applicant No. 1 has given amount i.e., Rs. 40,000/- to the non-applicant for purchasing the fridge and other 3 household things. Even after that, the applicant No. 1 was subjected to cruelty, harassment both physically and mentally by the non-applicant and his family members. Thereafter, the relatives of non-applicant, people of his society adivsed the non-applicant and his parents to look after the applicant No. 1 and her children i.e., applicant No. 2 & 3. In the month of September, 2021 the non-applicant has again solemnized the marriage with one Lileshwari who is the resident of village Lakhanpur (Jhalab Patewa). However, Lileshwari is the maternal aunt of the present non-applicant. It was further pleaded by the applicant No. 1 that when she objected with regard to the second marriage of the non-applicant, then his family members again tortured her both physically and mentally and used filthy language towards her and abandoned the applicant No. 1 from her matrimonial house and did not give her elder son Yash/applicant No. 2 to her despite her elder son’s health condition being bad. In the application under Section 125 of Cr. P.C. the applicant No. 1 has also pleaded that she has no source of income and she is totally dependent upon the non-applicant and the non-applicant is healthy, young and skilled businessman who own his business i.e., Choice Centre, whereby he earns Rs. 50,000/- per month and her father-in-law is working as a priest and doing worship work and from his work he is earning Rs. 25,000-Rs. 30,000/-. So, by way of the present application she has prayed for the maintenance amount of Rs. 10,000/- to her and Rs. 7,000/- each to her children i.e., applicants No. 2 & 3. 3. The non-applicant herein filed his reply to the aforesaid application and denied other averments made by the applicants. Therefore, the non- 4 applicant prayed for dismissal of the application moved by the applicants herein. 4. The learned Family Court by order dated 03.01.2025 held that applicants have sufficient cause to live separately from the non-applicant; applicant No. 1 is the wife of the non-applicant and applicants No. 2 & 3 are the children of the non-applicant and the non-applicant has social as well as moral responsibility of maintaining them, therefore, learned trial Court awarded the maintenance amount of Rs. 1,000/- ( one thousand rupees) to each of the applicants as maintenance from the date of this order i.e., 03.01.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the learned trial Court has awarded a meager amount of Rs.1000/- to each of the applicants. Applicant No. 1 is the wife of non-applicant and she is not having any source of income and she is totally dependent on her husband/non-appllicant and applicants No. 2 & 3 are legally dependent children of the non-applicant and at presently they are residing with her mother in their parental grandfather’s house since 04 to 05 years. He would lastly contend that the amount of maintenance may be enhanced and the impugned order may be set aside. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants and perused the documents. 7. Perusal of the record would show that the Family Court has granted maintenance to applicant No. 1, who is the wife of the non-applicant and applicants No. 2 & 3 i.e. minor children/sons of the non-applicant, who are aged about 07 years and 04 years respectively to the tune of Rs. 5 1000/- per month each. Applicant No. 1/wife has not filed any proof/document with regard to income of the non-applicant and the non- applicant runs a private shop/business of Choice Centre, therefore, in view of the considered opinion of this Court the amount of maintenance so granted by the family Court is on the lower side, and this Court deems it appropriate to enhance the amount of maintenance. Therefore, looking to the the price index which is prevailing in the society and hike in value of the commodities and also the fact that the applicant No. 1 is the wife of non-applicant and applicants No. 2 & 3 are leagally dependent children of the non-applicant and presently they are residing with her mother. However, her mother has no source of income for earning any amount as such she is not able to maintain herself and her children, it is directed that the non-applicant/respondent shall pay maintenance of Rs.1700/- to each of the applicants instead of Rs.1000/-, as such he shall pay a total amount of Rs. 5,100/- towards maintenance to the applicants. 8. Accordingly, the revision is partly allowed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Uttej