1 CGHC010220722026 2026:CGHC:27939 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 840 of 2026 Mr. Rambilas Jaiswal S/o Late Kanti Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 46 Years Occupation Teacher Govt. Primary School, Pusla, P.S. Patna Tahsil Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus Smt. Prabhvati Jaiswal W/o Rambilas Jaiswal Aged About 42 Years R/o Molhotra Gali Near Gudri Bazar Ambikapur, Distt. Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla along with Mr. Harsh Sahu and Mr. Ravi Singh, Advocates. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla along with Mr. Harsh Sahu and Mr. Ravi Singh, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer: “It is therefore prayed that, in view of the above, the impugned order dated 06/03/2024 (Annexure A/1) may kindly be set aside dismissing the application of the respondent for enhancement.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent, being the wife of the applicant, filed an application under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.09 12:04:51 +0530 2 Procedure seeking enhancement of the quantum of maintenance before the Learned Family Court on various grounds, including the rise in the cost of living, medical expenses, and other incidental expenses. The respondent prayed that the maintenance amount be enhanced from Rs. 3,500/- per month to Rs. 30,000/- per month. It is respectfully submitted that the respondent had earlier filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance for herself and her minor son, namely Ravi Kumar, before the Learned Family Court. The Learned Family Court awarded maintenance of Rs. 1,500/- per month. 4. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount, which was allowed by the Learned Family Court, enhancing the maintenance from ₹1,500/- per month to Rs. 3,500/- per month. 5. In the year 2022, the respondent again filed an application under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount. The said application was allowed by the learned Family Court, which enhanced the maintenance from Rs. 3,500/- per month to Rs. 5,000/- per month. 6. The applicant most respectfully submits that he had availed a loan of Rs. 12,00,000/- for the solemnization of his daughter’s marriage and is presently repaying the said loan by way of Equated Monthly Instalments (EMIs) of Rs. 27,641/- per month, which constitutes a substantial financial obligation upon him. It is further submitted that, in addition to the aforesaid loan liability, the applicant is also required to pay a life insurance premium amounting to Rs. 85,000/- per annum. 7. Learned Family Court, while deciding the application on merits, enhanced the quantum of maintenance from Rs. 3,500/- per month to Rs. 3 10,000/- per month in a mechanical and arbitrary manner, without duly appreciating the pleadings, submissions, and documentary evidence placed on record by the applicant. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned Family Court has acted with material irregularity and committed illegality of a grave nature while passing the impugned order. The impugned order is bad in law and deserves to be set aside by this Hon’ble Court. He submits that learned Family Court has passed the impugned order without proper appreciation of the documentary evidence produced by the applicant, thereby rendering its findings perverse and unsustainable in the eyes of law. Learned Family Court has failed to consider the material fact that the respondent is already in possession of the residential house belonging to the applicant and is deriving rental income of approximately Rs. 4,000/- per month from the said property. The learned Family Court has further failed to appreciate that the respondent is also in possession of the agricultural land belonging to the applicant’s family, from which she is carrying out agricultural activities and earning approximately Rs. 2,00,000/- per annum. Therefore, the aforesaid independent sources of income of the respondent clearly establish that she is financially capable of maintaining herself. However, this material fact has been completely overlooked by the learned Family Court while passing the impugned order. He also submits that one of the applicant’s sons, namely Ravi Kumar Jaiswal, who resides with the respondent, runs a mobile shop at Khadgawan and earns approximately Rs. 25,000/- per month. Therefore, he also bears the expenses of the respondent (his mother). The learned Family Court has also failed to consider the crucial documentary evidence produced by the applicant, including the official communication issued by the District Education Officer (DEO) dated 10.12.2025, which 4 clearly establishes that the applicant was due to retire from service on 31.05.2026. He also submits that the respondent did not produce any medical certificate relating to her treatment or any other documentary evidence in support of her claim for enhancement of the maintenance amount. Despite the absence of such evidence, the learned Family Court, by recording a false consent, passed the order enhancing the maintenance amount, which is wholly unjustified and unwarranted. He submits that learned Family Court has enhanced the maintenance amount in a mechanical manner without recording any cogent reasons and without considering the actual income, liabilities, and future financial condition of the applicant. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the judgment of the learned Family Court. 10. 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 by the respondent under Section 127 of the CrPC. Upon due appreciation of the material available on record, the learned Family Court enhanced the maintenance amount payable to the respondent to Rs. 10,000/-. 11. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, materials available on record and also considering the price index and medical expenses, total amount awarded to the respondent cannot be said to be shockingly on higher side warranting interference by this Court in the present revision petition. 12. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 5 13. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti