1 2026:CGHC:14404 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 423 of 2024 1 - Anusuiya W/o Laxmi Rakesh Aged About 38 Years R/o Manjhpara, Ward No. 06, Kharaud, Police Station Shivrinarayan, Dist. Janjgir-Champa, C.G. 2 - Kumari Chandni D/o Laxmi Rakesh Aged About 15 Years Being Minor Through Mother Anusuiya W/o Laxmi Rakesh Aged About 38 Years, R/o Manjhpara, Ward No. 06, Kharaud, Police Station Shivrinarayan, Dist. Janjgir- Champa, C.G. 3 - Kumari Neelam D/o Laxmi Rakesh Aged About 13 Years Being Minor Through Mother Anusuiya W/o Laxmi Rakesh Aged About 38 Years R/o Manjhpara, Ward No. 06, Kharaud, Police Station Shivrinarayan, Dist. Janjgir- Champa, C.G. ... Applicant versus Laxmi Rakesh S/o Chaituram Kahra Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Bazar Road Bilaigarh, Ward No. 15, Police Station And Tehsil Bilafigarh, Dist. Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, C.G. ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Ashwin Panickar, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 25.03.2026 1. Heard Mr. Ashwin Panickar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 11.01.2024 passed by the learned Family Court, Janjgir, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. 327/2022, whereby the learned Family Court, allowed the application under Section 127 of the CrPC filed by the applicants, and directed the applicant that he has to RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to the applicant No.1, and Rs. 1,500/- each to the applicant No.2 and 3 as maintenance. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that 29.02.2016 the Learned Family Court ordered maintenance of Rs. 2000 per month to the Applicant No.1, Rs. 1500/- to Bhavana, eldest daughter of Applicant No.1 and Respondent and Rs. 1000/- each to Applicants 2 and 3 under Section 125 of the CrPC. On 23.09.2022 The Applicants and Bhavana filed application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. seeking enhancement of maintenance from the Respondent. By order dated 11.01.2024 the learned Family Court, Janjgir keeping in mind the facts as to Respondent's name not being shown as owner in six acres of family land, lack of clarity as to Respondent running a shoe shop and lack of clarity in the Applicant's claim of 2.5 times enhancement in the Respondent's income and therefore granted enhanced maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month to the Applicant No.1 and enhanced maintenance of Rs.1500/- per month to Applicants 2 and 3 and denied maintenance to Bhavana on account of attaining majority. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the impugned order is arbitrary and contrary to the evidence and documents submitted by the applicant. It is further submitted that learned Family Court failed to observe the rise in expenses on account of the applicants No.2 and 3, the children of applicants No.1, and respondent growing older is a just ground for change in circumstances and thus ought to have increased the maintenance amount to a realistic amount and not to a token amount. Therefore, the order of the Family Court is liable to be modified. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, and from the perusal of the order of the Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, it transpires that after hearing all the statements of the witnesses and perusing the evidence available on record, the learned Family Court has passed the impugned order, and there is no any illegality and infirmity while passing the same which requires interference by this Court. 7. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 8. Let a certified copy of this order as well as original records be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar