1 CGHC010132852025 2026:CGHC:36254 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 478 of 2025 Rakesh Kumar Jangade S/o Rajkumar Jangade Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Bade Katekoni, Police Station And Tahsil Dabhara, District Sakti, Chhattigarh. ... Applicants versus 1 - Smt. Dhaneshwari @ Bindiya Jangade W/o Rakesh Kumar Jangade Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Bade Katekoni, Police Station And Tahsil Dabhara, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. At Present R/o Village Dhanagar, Police Station Kotara Road, Tahsil And District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Minor Shivans Jangade S/o Rakesh Kumar Jangade Aged About 14 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Dhaneshwari @ Bindiya (respondent No. 1) R/o Village Bade Katekoni, Police Station And Tahsil Dabhara, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. At Present R/o Village Dhanagar, Police Station Kotara Road, Tahsil And District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 25.01.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Raigarh, District – Raigarh (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. F-15/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the respondents, and ordered the applicant that he has to pay the allowance for maintenance at the rate of total Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondents. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The facts, in brief, is that the respondent No.1 has filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC for grant of maintenance of Rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 7,000/- from her husband. The marriage of the applicant and the respondent No.1 was solemnized on 09.05.2020 in Hindu Rites and Rituals at Village Tata (Khartal) and on 08.11.2021, out of their wedlock, the respondent No.2 was born who is patient of sickling disease. As per the application filed by the wife is that after the marriage of applicant with the respondent No.1, both are residing at the house of applicant happily only for one month and thereafter the applicant torturing the wife and demanded Rs.8 lakhs and motorcycle and thereafter the respondent No.2 was born, who is suffering from sickling disease and the treatment of non- applicant No.2 is going at Ankur Hospital Raigarh regularly and on 24-04-2022 at about 5.00 PM, the wife and applicant reached at Village Katekoni, where again the applicant started torturing the respondent No.1 and therefore both the respondents went to their parental house and from Month of April, 2022, the applicant ousted the respondents and not taking care about them and therefore the respondents are not having any source of income, hence they have filed the application for grant of maintenance of Rs.7000/- 7000/- per month from the applicant. 4. The applicant herein has filed the reply to the said application and has denied the averments raised by the respondents. The learned Family Court after perusal of the documents passed the impugned order, and has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the respondent for grant of maintenance and directed the applicant to pay the maintenance to the tune of total Rs. 5,000/- per month to the 3 respondents. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, is contrary to the facts and evidence available on record. It is further submitted that the respondent has left the house of the applicant without any sufficient reason and with her own free will, thus, as per the provision contained in Section 125(4) of CrPC, she is not entitled to be granted maintenance. Therefore, the impugned order is bad in law, perverse and erroneous, and the same it is liable to be set-aside/quashed. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the impugned order dated 25.01.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Raigarh, District – Raigarh (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. F-15/2023, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the respondents, and ordered the applicant that he has to pay the allowance for maintenance at the rate of total Rs. 5,000/- per month to the respondents, and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 8. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and from the perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised by the applicant’s side, and after hearing all the statements of 4 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. 9. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 10. Let a certified copy of this order and original records be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar