1 2026:CGHC:3699 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 954 of 2023 Smt. Purnima Jaiswal W/o Shri Dhruv Kumar Aged About 26 Years R/o Pratappur Road, Gudari Chowk, Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus Dhruv Kumar S/o Shri Moti Lal Shah Aged About 32 Years R/o Flat No. 707, Surbhi Heights I.S.R.O. Colony, Ayodhya Bypass, District : Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Shubham Dwivedi, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.01.2026 1. Heard Mr. Shubham Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 11.07.2023 passed by the learned Family Court, Ambikapur, District – Sarguja (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 216/2021, whereby the learned Family Court, rejected the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant for grant of maintenance. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that applicant had filed an application under section 125 of the CrPC Before the learned Family Court Seeking Maintenance from the respondent who is the husband of the applicant. the Applicant and Respondent got married on 31.01.2019 as per Hindu rituals in Ambikapur, Dist- Sarguja, Chhattisgarh, and as per the Financial Capacity of the parents of the Applicant, they have given RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 one gold chain, three rings, to the respondent and one gold necklace with Chain, Bangle, Mangalsutra, three rings, Nathiya, Silver Pajeb, Four Pair of Toe rings, Two Pair of Anklet and to purchase Daily use stuff and Television, refrigerator, Air Conditioner, Almira, Diwan, Sofa set Rs. 1,50,000 cash has been given to the respondent. 4. After the marriage Applicant along with Respondent shifted to the native place of the Respondent, at District-Kaimur(Bihar) thereafter because of the transferable job of Respondent they shifted to Varanasi, Jamshedpur, and Bhopal. That during the initial day of marriage, the behavior of the in-laws of the applicant was good but after a few days they started harassing the applicant in the name of dowry. Thereafter the respondent and his family members started putting pressure on the applicant to bring more dowry and demanded to give more amount of moneyto them, so the father of the applicant gave Rs.25,000/-and 50,000/- in cash, and in the bank account of the respondent transferred Rs. 64,000/-, even after fulfilling the demands of the respondent and his family members the cruelty of the respondent and his family members didn't stop against the applicant. 5. The condition of the applicant in the house of the respondent was miserable as she was ill-treated by the respondent and his family members and she was harassed in every possible way by them, the respondent forced the applicant to do all the household chores without food giving her food, also whenever the applicant fell sick, the respondent never took her for the treatment. The espondent used to drink alcohol and used to come drunk at night and when the applicant and whenever the applicant tried to make Mim understand that this is 3 unacceptable and he should not do this the respondent used to fight with the applicant. That the respondent had relationships with a few women before the marriage and even after the marriage the respondent used to talk with them through social media, When the applicant confronted the respondent about the same, the applicant got brutally harassed and beaten up by the respondent. As the situation got worsened due to internal injury the applicant visited the doctor in Bhopal. 6. The applicant compromised and adjusted even after so much harassment and cruelty solely because of the belief that after the due passage of time, the respondent and his family member will change and she had to keep up the family being wife and daughter in law but nothing changed with time whereas, in the month of October 2020, the respondent and his family members assaulted the applicant so badly, that thereafter the applicant called her parents and came back to her parents home, subsequently, the family members of the applicant took her to the doctor for treatment and ever since then the applicant is at her parent's home in Ambikapur. 7. The respondent continued to harass the applicant by abusing and threatening the applicant and her family and friends through calls and text messages from different phone numbers, being aggrieved by the tortuous behavior of the respondent, the applicant filed the complaint against the respondent on 25/10/2021, looking into the matter the police didn't registered the FIR but gave warning to the respondent. Thereafter, when the situation got worst and his threatening calls continued to come police registered the FIR on different dates. On 4 12/11/2021 FIR was lodged (Crime no. 85/2021) by the Applicant under sections 498-A, 294, 323, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, on 08/12/2021 FIR was lodged (Crime no.1301/2021) by the father of the Applicant under sections 294 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and on 20/12/2021 again the FIR was lodged (crime no. 1341/2021) by the Applicant under section 507 and section 509 of Indian Penal Code, as the respondent started to blackmail the applicant and threatened the Applicant to take back the case. That, thereafter the respondent was arrested by the police after which he was released on Anticipatory bail. 8. In between the respondent has sent the notice of divorce to the applicant dated 25/10/2021, which was received by the applicant on 02/11/2021 and the same is pending in family court, district Bhopal (M.P). Thereafter due to financial crisis the applicant filed the application for Maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. 9. The respondent herein has filed the reply to the said application and has denied the averments raised by the applicant. The learned Family Court has recorded the statement of the parties. The witnesses were examined before the learned Family Court including the applicant and the respondent. The learned Family Court by passing the impugned order, has rejected the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicant for grant of maintenance. Hence, this revision. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the impugned order is contrary to the facts, law and circumstances of this case. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court has failed to consider that the applicant herein is in poor health condition and even if she is educated, she is not able to do a job so that she can maintain herself. 5 Therefore, the impugned order is contrary to the facts, and the same is liable to be modified. 11. Learned counsel for the applicant lastly submits that the respondent refused to accept notice from this Court in present revision several times, meanwhile, he contested and secured divorce from the same address in Bhopal (M.P.), also he contested the maintenance case as well from the same address. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 13. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, and from the perusal of the order of the Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, it transpires that after hearing all the statements of the witnesses and perusing the evidence available on record, the learned Family Court has passed the impugned order, and there is no any illegality and infirmity while passing the same which requires interference by this Court. 14. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 15. Let a certified copy of this order as well as original records be transmitted to the concerned trial Court within a week for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar