1 2026:CGHC:26588 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 786 of 2026 1 - Smt. Swati Thakur W/o Suresh Singh Thakur Aged About 42 Years D/o Ashok Thakur, R/o C/o Shri Shivkumar Thakur, Thakurpara, Takhatpur, Tahsil- Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Now R/o Hansika Vihar Colony, Uslapur, Behind Punjab National Bank, Uslapur, P.S.- Civil Line, Tahsil- Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Ku. Mauli Thakur Aged About 19 Years R/o C/o Shri Shivkumar Thakur, Thakurpara, Takhatpur, Tahsil- Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Now R/o Hansika Vihar Colony, Uslapur, Behind Punjab National Bank, Uslapur, P.S.- Civil Line, Tahsil- Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Ku. Kritika Thakur D/o Suresh Thakur Aged About 16 Years Minor Represented Through Natural Guardian And Mother Swati Thakur, R/o C/o Shri Shivkumar Thakur, Thakurpara, Takhatpur, Tahsil- Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) Now R/o Hansika Vihar Colony, Uslapur, Behind Punjab National Bank, Uslapur, P.S.- Civil Line, Tahsil- Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus Suresh Singh Thakur S/o Mahaveer Prasad Thakur Aged About 46 Years R/o Usha Upvan, House No. 75, Village- Lokhandi, Ahead Mangla Housing Colony, Tahsil- Sakri, P.S.- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) Office Address- Office Of Personnel Manager, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Bharat Rajput, Advocate RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30.06.2026 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicants with the following prayer: “It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this revision and the maintenance amount awarded vide order dated 16.04.2026 by the learned Family Court may kindly be enhanced suitably in favour of applicants, in the interest of justice.” 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the marriage between applicant No. 1 and the non-applicant was solemnized in accordance with Hindu rites and customs, and out of the said wedlock applicant Nos. 2 and 3 were born. Owing to matrimonial discord, the parties started residing separately, with applicant Nos. 1 and 2 residing with applicant No. 1, while the non-applicant has been living separately. Earlier, the applicants had preferred an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking maintenance, which came to be allowed by the learned Family Court vide order dated 13.09.2019 passed in Misc. Criminal Case No. 55/2017, awarding maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month in favour of the applicants. Subsequently, on account of the substantial increase in the cost of living and educational as well as day-to-day expenses of the applicants, they preferred an 3 application under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to alteration/enhancement of maintenance), seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount. It was specifically pleaded that the non-applicant is employed as a Loco Pilot in South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, drawing a monthly salary of approximately Rs.1,56,506/-, besides earning rental income from three residential houses situated in Bilaspur. It was further averred that applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are pursuing their education and require expenses towards school fees, books, uniforms, tuition, transportation and other educational necessities, while applicant No. 1, being a homemaker with no independent source of income, is unable to meet her basic expenses, including food, clothing and medical needs, from the maintenance already awarded. The non-applicant opposed the application by filing his reply, contending that the existing maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month was adequate and that no case for enhancement was made out. Upon consideration of the pleadings and the material available on record, the learned Family Court, vide order dated 16.04.2026, partly allowed the application and enhanced the maintenance to Rs.30,000/- per month. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of enhancement on the ground that the same is wholly inadequate considering the income of the non-applicant and the present cost of living, the applicants have preferred the present Criminal Revision. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the learned Family Court has erred both on facts and in law in enhancing the maintenance to only Rs.30,000/- per month, which is wholly 4 inadequate considering the financial status of the non-applicant and the present cost of living. It is contended that the learned Family Court failed to properly appreciate that the non-applicant is employed as a Loco Pilot in South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, drawing a monthly salary of approximately Rs.1,56,506/-, apart from earning substantial rental income from three residential houses owned by him in Bilaspur. It is further submitted that applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are school-going children and incur considerable expenditure towards education, including school fees, books, uniforms, tuition, transportation and other day-to-day necessities, while applicant No. 1, being a homemaker with no independent source of income, is required to meet her expenses towards food, clothing, medicines and other essential needs. Learned counsel submits that the maintenance awarded by the learned Family Court is insufficient to enable the applicants to maintain themselves with dignity and to enjoy a standard of living commensurate with that of the non-applicant, as envisaged under law. It is further contended that the learned Family Court failed to properly appreciate the oral and documentary evidence available on record and did not consider the genuine needs of the applicants in the proper perspective while determining the quantum of maintenance. It is, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be modified by suitably enhancing the maintenance amount in favour of the applicants. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 5 5. From a perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court, after due consideration of the pleadings of the parties, the oral and documentary evidence adduced on record, and the material placed before it, has rightly appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned Family Court has duly taken into account the admitted relationship between the parties, the previous order of maintenance, the increase in the cost of living, the educational and day-to-day requirements of applicant Nos. 2 and 3, the financial needs of applicant No. 1, as well as the earning capacity and service particulars of the non-applicant, who is employed as a Loco Pilot in South East Central Railway, Bilaspur. Upon a proper appreciation of the entire material available on record, the learned Family Court found it appropriate to partly allow the application for enhancement of maintenance and enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.30,000/- per month vide order dated 16.04.2026. The findings recorded by the learned Family Court are based on proper appreciation of the evidence and settled principles governing enhancement of maintenance. 6. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants 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. 6 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 be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan