1 CGHC010348952026 2026:CGHC:39852 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1191 of 2026 1 - Ritesh Devnath S/o Shibu Devnath Aged About 35 Years R/o G-403, Solars Heights, 4th Floor Near Pani Tanki, Amalidih Main Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Shilpi Devnath W/o Ritesh Devnath Aged About 33 Years R/o 40, Near Vishwa Hindu Parishad Office P.S. Pandri, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery) For Applicant : Mr. Banhiman Roy, Advocate. For Respondent : - (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 11/09/2026 1. Heard on I.A. No.02/2026, an application for condonation of delay in filing the instant criminal revision. 2. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, which is well supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed and the delay of 56 days in filing the present criminal revision is hereby condoned. 3. Also heard on admission. RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2026.09.16 10:07:34 +0530 2 4. This Criminal Revision has been preferred by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, against the impugned order dated 09.04.2026 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (CG) in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.258/2025 (Smt. Shilpi Devnath vs. Ritesh Devnath), whereby learned Family Court has partly allowed the application preferred by the respondent/wife under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (henceforth, “BNSS”) and awarded maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per month in her favour. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no fixed source of income and is only 12th pass. Earlier, he was working as a Manager at Colours Mall, Raipur, where he was being paid a salary of approximately Rs.15-16,000/- per month. However, he has now left the said job and is searching for employment. It is further submitted that the applicant also has the responsibility of maintaining his parents, his father being a retired employee of SECL. Despite that, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur has awarded maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per month in favour of the respondent/wife by way of an ex parte order, which is on the higher side. Hence, he prays that the maintenance amount may suitably be reduced. 6. Perusal of the impugned order shows that, during the maintenance proceeding under Section 144 of the BNSS initiated by respondent/wife, the applicant/husband neither appeared before the learned Family Court nor adduced any evidence in support of his case. Although it has been submitted before this Court that the applicant was earlier working as a Manager at Colours Mall, Raipur, no document has been placed on record to demonstrate the fact that he has left the said job or that he has no present source of income. Vide impugned order, the learned Family Court 3 has awarded only Rs.7,000/- per month towards maintenance in favour of the respondent/wife. Considering the prevailing prices and the cost of living at present, the said amount cannot be said to be excessive or on the higher side. More particularly, the applicant/husband did not enter appearance before the learned Family Court during the proceedings and did not participate in the trial. Therefore, he cannot take advantage of his own absence and seek reduction of the maintenance amount merely on the ground that the order was passed ex parte. 7. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Revision is dismissed at the motion stage. 8. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar