1 2026:CGHC:419 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 338 of 2025 Asha Nayak W/o Shri Shitir Nayak Aged About 30 Years R/o C/o Ramgopal Sahu, Ward No. 26, Near Kirana Store, House Of Kanti Sahu, Kukri Talab, Behind Railway Station, Police Station Gudyari, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus Shitir Nayak S/o Late Shri Neelmani Nayak Aged About 31 Years R/o Umabai Chura, Jai Khambh Gali, Dulari Nagar, Kailashpuri, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05 /01/2026 1. Heard Mr. Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The applicant has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 24.01.2025 passed by learned 1st Additional Principal AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Case No.617/2023, whereby the application filed by the applicant for interim maintenance was rejected. 3. The applicant–wife filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance along with an application for interim maintenance, stating that her marriage with the respondent was solemnized on 13.08.2020 as per Hindu rites at Raipur. Prior to this marriage, the applicant was married earlier and has a minor daughter from that wedlock, which ended due to the death of her first husband in July 2020, a fact which was disclosed to and accepted by the respondent. After marriage, the applicant, respondent, and the minor child lived together at Raipur, however, due to alleged neglect, cruelty, and denial of maintenance by the respondent, the applicant was compelled to seek maintenance. The respondent, a civil engineer by profession, is alleged to be earning about Rs.30 lakh per annum. The respondent denied the marriage and opposed the maintenance claim. During the proceedings, both parties filed affidavits in compliance with the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha. However, by order dated 24.01.2025, the learned Family Court rejected the application for interim maintenance on the ground that the marital relationship was not prima facie established. Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant has preferred the present criminal revision. 3 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the application for interim maintenance has been rejected, whereas the proceedings for final maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. are still pending, with the next date fixed as 21.01.2026, a copy of the status report has been produced, which has been taken on record by the trial Court today itself. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with criminal revision. 6. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the Family Court rejected the application for interim maintenance filed by the applicant / wife observing that the applicant failed to prima facie establish her status as the legally wedded wife of the respondent. Since the factum of marriage was specifically denied and not supported by sufficient documentary evidence at the interim stage, the Court held that the applicant was not entitled to interim maintenance, and accordingly, rejected the application. 7. 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. 8. However, the present revision is disposed of with the direction that the concerned Family Court is at liberty to conclude the 4 proceedings under Section 125 of CrPC, preferably within a period of three months from today, if there is no any legal impediment as the application for final maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is still pending, and the matter is fixed for hearing. 9. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the concerned Family Court for necessary compliance and follow up action. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil