1 2026:CGHC:9018 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 264 of 2026 Santoshi Netam W/o Pawan Netam Aged About 30 Years R/o Carter No. 791, Ait/2, Near Housing Board Water Tank Murga Chowk, Jamul, Bhillai, Tahsil and District - Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Pawan Netam S/o Shivcharan Netam Aged About 36 Years R/o Ward No. 9, Near Pardeshi Pan Bhandar, Aryanagar, Kohka Bhilai, P.S. Smriti Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sahdev Yadav, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.02.2026 1. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the judgment dated 18.11.2025 passed by the learned Third Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No.600/2024, whereby the learned Family Court has enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs.6,000/- per month in favour of the applicant. 2. The facts, in brief, is that the applicant/wife filed an application under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking enhancement of maintenance. The present Criminal Revision is preferred against the order dated 18.11.2025 passed by the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg in MJC No. 600/2024, whereby the learned PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.02.20 17:18:34 +0530 2 Court enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 6,000/- per month in favour of the applicant. According to the applicant, she is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. Their marriage was solemnized on 17.04.2017 in accordance with Hindu customs. After marriage, she resided with the respondent at his rented house. The respondent allegedly assaulted the applicant under the influence of alcohol and maintained an illicit relationship with a woman named Swati, against whom the applicant lodged a written complaint before the Women’s Cell. However, as the respondent is serving as a Constable in the Police Department, no action was taken against him. The applicant is presently residing in a rented house and is entirely dependent on her aged parents, who are barely able to support themselves. That the learned Family Court failed to properly appreciate the evidence on record, including the actual income, liabilities, and dependent family members of the respondent, and passed the impugned order in a mechanical and arbitrary manner. That the applicant respectfully submits that the enhancement of maintenance was granted without properly considering the financial capacity of the respondent and without sufficient proof of additional income or substantial change in circumstances, as required under Section 127 Cr.P.C. Being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg, the applicant prefers this revision petition 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, is contrary to law and facts. The learned Family Court committed a grave error of law in enhancing the maintenance amount without recording a clear finding regarding change in circumstances, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 127 Cr.P.C. The learned Family Court failed to consider that the respondent is a Class-III Government employee (Constable) with 3 a net salary of approximately Rs. 44,116/- per month after statutory deductions. The impugned order is contrary to the settled principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts regarding fixation and enhancement of maintenance. The applicant is about 30 years of age and was deserted by her husband without reasonable cause, who is allegedly maintaining an illicit relationship with another woman, namely Swati. The learned Family Court failed to properly consider the material contradictions and omissions on record. The learned Family Court erred in partly allowing the application for enhancement and granting only a meagre increase of Rs. 1,000/- per month. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and 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, and considering the conditions of both the parties, 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 criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 7. Let a certified copy of this order as well as original record be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/-- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti