1 2026:CGHC:5819 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 587 of 2024 Bihari Lal Jaiswal S/o Badri Prasad Aged About 45 Years Occupation Business, R/o Gandhi Chowk, Ward No. 41, Police Station City Kotwali, Satna, District Satna (Madhya Pradesh) ... Applicant versus Smt. Sarita Jaiswal W/o Shri Bihari Lal Jaiswal Aged About 38 Years Occupation Housewife, R/o Gandhi Chowk, Ward No. 41, Police Station City Kotwali, Satna, District Satna (Madhya Pradesh) At Present Society Gali, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent : None. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.02.2026 1. None appeared on behalf of the respondent to press this revision petition when the case is called out for hearing. 2. Heard Mr. Aman Sharma, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant. 3. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer: “It is, therefore most respectfully prayed in the interest of justice that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.02.03 14:39:12 +0530 2 to allow the revision and be pleased to set-aside/reduce the impugned order dated 30-03- 2024 (Annexure A-1), in the interest of justice.” 4. Facts of the case are that the respondent/wife filed an application before the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh Camp, Baikuntpur, District Koriya (C.G.), under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of maintenance. 5. Notice was issued by the learned Family Court, pursuant to which the applicant/husband appeared and sought time to file his reply. 6. The applicant/husband appeared before the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh Camp, Baikuntpur, District Koriya (C.G.), and filed his reply to the maintenance application along with an afÏdavit. 7. The applicant/husband had submitted a written complaint against the respondent/wife on 28.11.2021 before City Kotwali, Satna (M.P.). The complaint stated, inter alia, that his wife was neither doing any household work nor cooking food and had threatened that she would neither drink water nor eat food at the matrimonial home until his brother returned. The applicant/husband had also submitted another written complaint against the respondent/wife on 04.12.2020 before City Kotwali, Satna (M.P.). In the said complaint, it was stated that the respondent/wife, along with her relatives namely Pramod, Anil, and Sushil Jaiswal; their father Late Ramdev Jaiswal; and her maternal uncle’s son Manohar Jaiswal, all residents of Baikunthpur, Chhattisgarh, subjected the applicant/husband to continuous mental harassment and threatened to falsely implicate him in criminal cases. The mother of the applicant/husband has been suffering from exacerbation of bronchial asthma and requires oxygen inhalation two to three times a day and sometimes continuously for two to 3 three days. She is also suffering from hypertension and severe vaginal bleeding intermittently. She requires constant nursing care, is bedridden, unable to move or walk, and passes urine and stool in bed. She has been in this condition since the year 2015. 8. Despite the aforesaid facts, the learned Family Court, in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 50/2022 before the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh Camp at Baikuntpur, District Koriya (C.G.), proceeded to award maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- to the respondent. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order dated 30.03.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh Camp, Baikuntpur, District Koriya (C.G.), is illegal, arbitrary, and bad in the eyes of law, as the learned Family Court has no authority to pass such an order without properly hearing the applicant. He also submits that the marriage of the applicant/husband with the respondent/wife was solemnized on 06.05.2019 as per Hindu rites and customs in the presence of family members and members of society at Satna, District Satna (M.P.). The respondent/wife left the matrimonial home only five months after the marriage. The applicant/husband went to her parental home to bring her back; however, at that time his mother was on ventilator and in a critical condition, due to which he could not personally go again to take her back. He contacted the respondent’s family and requested them to send her back, but they insisted that he should come personally. Thereafter, the respondent/wife did not return to the matrimonial home for about one and a quarter years. He further submits that the applicant/husband is unemployed, has no independent source of income, and is dependent upon his brother. He only looks after his brother’s rice mill and does not receive any salary therefrom. The respondent/wife is fully aware of these facts, yet she has filed a false 4 maintenance application with the intention of harassing the applicant. The mother of the applicant/husband has been suffering from exacerbation of bronchial asthma and requires oxygen inhalation two to three times a day and sometimes continuously for two to three days. She is also suffering from hypertension and severe vaginal bleeding intermittently. She requires constant nursing care, is bedridden, unable to move or walk, and passes urine and stool in bed. She has been in this condition since the year 2015. The applicant has already filed his reply before the learned Judge, Family Court, Manendragarh Camp, Baikuntpur, District Koriya (C.G.). 10. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 50/2022 has been pending before the learned Family Court, Manendragarh Camp, Baikuntpur, District Koriya (C.G.), for the last three years, whereas matrimonial disputes are required to be decided expeditiously. The respondent/wife stayed in the matrimonial home only for five months, and after leaving for her parental home, she never returned to the matrimonial house of the applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the judgment of the learned Family Court. 12. Upon perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court, after duly considering the pleadings, documents, and evidence adduced by the parties, has partly allowed the application filed under Section 125 of the CrPC by the respondent. The learned Family Court, upon appreciation of the material available on record, awarded maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month to respondent. 13. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record and also considering the price 5 index and medical expenses, total amount awarded to the respondent cannot be said to be shockingly high warranting interference by this Court in the present revision petition. 14. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek