1 2026:CGHC:8138 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1435 of 2024 Ram Kumar Pandey S/o Rajendra Prasad Pandey, Aged About 40 Years R/o Muhalla Holiwala, Holi Road, Baldev, Police Station Baldev, Mathura, District- Mathura (Uttar Pradesh) ... Applicant versus 1. Anita Pandey W/o Ramkumar Pandey, Aged About 39 Years R/o Patanjali Gali, Awadhpuri, Village-Bhathagaon, Police Station- Purani Basti, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. Tina Pandey D/o Ramkumar Pandey, Aged About 6 Years R/o Patanjali Gali, Awadhpuri, Village- Bhathagaon, Police Station- Purani Basti, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13 .02.2026 1. This criminal revision has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the proceeding under Section 125(3) of Cr.P.C./144(3) of BNSS, 2023 in Misc. Criminal Case No.1210/2024, whereby the learned Family Court, Raipur has initiated recovery proceeding for order passed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for maintenance of respondents. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the marriage between the applicant and respondent No. 1 was solemnized on 13.12.2005 at Raipur. Out of their wedlock, respondent No. 2 was born on 31.08.2008. Respondent No. 1 has been living separately from the applicant since the year 2009. On PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.02.19 10:27:15 +0530 2 23.09.2024, respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 144(3) of the B.N.S.S. for execution of the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the Hon’ble High Court in CRR No. 358/2023. Upon coming to know that respondent No. 1, Anita Pandey, had been previously married prior to her marriage with the applicant and that there had been no legal dissolution of her earlier marriage, the applicant filed an application under Section 127 of Cr.P.C./Section 146 of B.N.S.S. seeking alteration/recall of the maintenance order passed in favour of the respondents. Being aggrieved by the impugned proceedings/order, the applicant is filing the present revision petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the pending application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. challenges the validity and maintainability of the order passed under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. The said application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C./Section 146 of the B.N.S.S. is presently pending consideration before the learned Family Court. Respondent No. 1, during her cross-examination in the proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. in Case No. 111/2018, admitted that prior to her marriage with the applicant, she had been married to one Dinesh Pandey (Sharma). Therefore, the marriage between the applicant and respondent No. 1 is void ab initio, as respondent No. 1 had not legally dissolved her earlier marriage nor obtained a decree of divorce from her previous husband at the time of her marriage with the applicant. If the proceedings under Section 125(3) of the Cr.P.C. are not set aside or stayed during the pendency of the application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C., the same would cause irreparable loss and injury to the applicant. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and 3 documents appended thereto. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, and from the perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, 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. 6. Accordingly, the present revision being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 7. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti