1 2026:CGHC:7374 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1434 of 2024 Pritam Prasad Bhaskar S/o Rekharam Bhaskar Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Lalpur Kala, Post Office Mohagaon, Thana Pandatarai, Tahsil Pandariya, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. Pin- 491559 ... Applicant(s) versus Yogeshwari Bhaskar W/o Pritam Bhaskar Aged About 30 Years D/o Ramji Dindoure, R/o Village Dharampura, Post Office Chilfi Bangla, Police Chowki Chilfi Bangla, Thana And Tahsil Lormi, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. Pin- 495115 ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vijay K. Deshmukh, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10 /02/2026 1. The applicant has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 20.11.2024 passed by learned Family Court, Mungeli, District – Mungeli (C.G.) in M.J.C. No.510/2023, whereby, the 2 learned Family Court partly allowed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent and directed the applicant to pay Rs.4,000/- per month to respondent, towards maintenance. 2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this revision are that the marriage between the applicant/husband, Pritam Prasad Bhaskar, and the respondent-wife was solemnized on 16.04.2012 at Village Lalpur (Kala), District Kabirdham, out of which wedlock three children were born, namely Poornima Bhaskar aged about 12 years, Golu aged about 10 years, and Ratnesh aged about 08 years, all of whom are residing with and under the care and custody of the applicant/father since their birth. It is the case of the applicant that the respondent-wife voluntarily left the matrimonial home on 06.09.2021 and has been living separately since then at Bilaspur, where she is allegedly residing with her Jija (brother-in-law) in an adulterous relationship, despite the said Jija having his own family and children. The applicant further submits that complaints regarding the illicit relationship of the respondent- wife were lodged by him on 13.09.2021 and again on 22.04.2022, whereas, as a counterblast, the respondent-wife lodged a false criminal complaint against the applicant on 22.04.2022 under Sections 294 and 323 of the IPC. It is further alleged that during the Holi festival of 2022, the applicant found the respondent-wife and her said Jija in a compromising position at his house, following which the respondent-wife left the matrimonial home abandoning all three minor children. The respondent-wife is stated 3 to be gainfully employed as a Petrol Pump Operator at Tahir Petrol Pump, Jarhabhata, Bilaspur, earning approximately Rs.15,000/- per month and residing at the house of her said Jija. Despite these facts, the learned Family Court, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.), by order dated 20.11.2024 passed in M.J.C. No. 510/2023, allowed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and awarded maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month in favour of the respondent-wife, against which the present revision has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law, inasmuch as under Section 144(3) & (4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the respondent-wife is not entitled to maintenance as she is living separately without sufficient cause and is alleged to be living in an adulterous relationship. Despite the evidence and documents produced on record regarding her conduct, independent income and adulterous living, the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the same in its proper perspective. He further submits that the respondent-wife has not claimed maintenance for the three minor children, as admittedly all the children are residing with and are being maintained by the applicant-husband. The respondent-wife has willfully deserted the matrimonial home and neglected her own children, which clearly disentitles her from claiming any maintenance under law. The learned Trial Court has committed 4 grave error in law by ignoring the material evidence available on record and in granting maintenance solely in favour of the respondent-wife. He also submits that the applicant has successfully established his case and the conduct of the respondent-wife stands proved on record; however, the findings recorded by the learned Trial Court regarding the alleged entitlement of maintenance are perverse and unsustainable in law. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with criminal revision. 5. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court partly allowed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent and directed the applicant to pay Rs.4,000/- per month to respondent, towards maintenance, holding that the marriage between the parties and birth of three children are undisputed, the respondent was living separately from the applicant since 21.04.2022, and she was able to establish sufficient cause for separate residence on account of alleged cruelty and assault by the applicant. The learned Family Court further held that the applicant has sufficient means to maintain the respondent and the respondent failed to be proved as having independent sufficient income, thereby entitling her to receive maintenance. 5 6. Considering the submissions 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 Family Court has not committed any illegality or infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 7. Accordingly, the revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 8. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit the original record to the concerned Family Court within a week from today for necessary information and follow up action. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil