1 2026:CGHC:6300 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 179 of 2026 Smt. Pinki W/o Sandeep Aged About 22 Years Presently R/o Village- Lavanban, P.S. Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus Sandeep S/o Khilawan Dahariya Aged About 24 Years R/o Village- Bhandapuri, P.S. Kharora, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rustam Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04.02.2026 1. This criminal revision has been 昀椀led by the applicant with the following prayer: “It is therefore, that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this criminal revision and set-aside impugned order dated 01.01.2026 and also may kindly be granted maintenance amount of Rs. 15,000/- per month as sought by the applicant in application under section 144 of BNSS, in the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 interest of justice.” 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the applicant 昀椀led an application under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month from the respondent, pleading that their marriage was solemnized according to Hindu rites and customs on 30.03.2023 at Village Lavanban, Police Station Balodabazar, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh). It was averred that after the marriage the applicant initially resided peacefully in her matrimonial home, but within a short period the respondent subjected her to physical and mental cruelty on account of alleged insu昀케ciency of dowry, despite her parents having given gold, silver and other articles worth about Rs.2,50,000/-, assaulted her, expressed intention to contract a second marriage and ultimately drove her out of the matrimonial house, compelling her to reside at her parental home. The applicant further pleaded that she is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and has no independent source of livelihood, whereas the respondent is engaged in JCB business earning about Rs.20,000/- per month and also owns agricultural land measuring about 4–5 acres yielding annual income of approximately Rs.4,00,000/-. The respondent denied the allegations by 昀椀ling a reply. However, the learned Family Court, after recording the pleadings and evidence of the parties, vide impugned order dated 01.01.2026 dismissed the applicant’s claim for maintenance. Hence, the present petition. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order dated 01.01.2026 (Annexure A-1) passed by the learned Family Court, Balodabazar-Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh), dismissing the applicant’s claim for maintenance under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is illegal, erroneous and contrary to the evidence and material available on record. It is contended that the applicant is the legally wedded wife of the respondent, who had been compelled to leave her matrimonial home on account of physical and mental cruelty, harassment and dowry demands made by the respondent, and she has no independent source of income for her livelihood. It is further submitted that the respondent is 昀椀nancially capable of maintaining the applicant, being engaged in JCB business earning about Rs.20,000/- per month and also possessing agricultural land measuring about 4–5 acres yielding substantial annual income, yet the learned Family Court ignored these material aspects and rejected the maintenance application without proper appreciation of facts and law. Learned counsel submits that the impugned order su昀昀ers from non-application of mind and is contrary to the settled principles governing grant of maintenance to a legally wedded wife, thereby depriving the applicant of her lawful entitlement and causing grave hardship. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appropriate maintenance deserves to be awarded to the applicant in the interest of justice. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 4 5. From the perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Family Court, after duly appreciating the pleadings of both the parties, the oral and documentary evidence adduced on record, and the surrounding facts and circumstances of the case, has rightly dismissed the application preferred by the applicant under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking grant of maintenance. The impugned order dated 01.01.2026 is a well-reasoned and speaking order passed in accordance with law and the settled principles governing grant of maintenance, and the learned Court has recorded proper 昀椀ndings based on the material available on record. 6. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perusing the impugned order and the 昀椀nding recorded by the learned Family Court, I am of the view that the Family Court has not committed any illegality or in昀椀rmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 7. Accordingly, the criminal revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 8. Let a certi昀椀ed copy of this order be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan