Sankara, V.T.C. Patan, District Durg (C.G.) v. Guha Singh S
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:40567 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 296 of 2024 1. Smt. Kiran Jangde W/o Shri Guha Singh, Aged About 38 Years R/o House No. 338, Phase-2, Patan Raipur Road, Maruti Infracity, Village and Post Sankara, V.T.C. Patan, District Durg (C.G.) 2. Ku. Nidhi D/o Guha Singh, Aged About 13 Years (Minor) Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Kiran Jangde (applicant No.1) R/o House No.338, Phase-2, Patan Raipur Road, Maruti Infracity, Village And Post- Sankara, V.T.C. Patan, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicants versus Guha Singh S/o Valmiki Jangde, Aged About 45 Years R/o Jungle Side, Near High School Udaiya Mohalla, Bandhapara, Bankimogara, Tehsil- Katghora, District-Korba (CG) ... Respondent For Applicants For Respondent
Legal Reasoning
: Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate. : Mr. F. S. Khare, Advocate. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.08.14 18:49:21 +0530 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.08.2025 1. 2. Heard Ms. Ruchi Nagar, learned counsel appearing for the applicants. Also heard Mr. F. S. Khare, learned counsel for the respondent. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 24.01.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Camp 2 Court, Kathghora, District - Korba (C.G.) in Criminal M.J.C No. 01/2023, filed by the applicants under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. for enhancement of maintenance, wherein the learned Family Court has increased the maintenance amount for applicant No.1/wife from Rs.8,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- and for applicant No.2/daughter from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 9,000/- i.e. total sum of Rs. 19,000/- has been awarded to the applicants. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that applicant No.1 is the legally wedded wife of the Respondent, and the parties are governed by Hindu Law. The marriage between the applicant and the Respondent was solemnized on 11.02.2010. applicant No.2 is the legitimate daughter of the Respondent, born out of the said wedlock. On 26.10.2011, the Respondent, along with his family members, physically assaulted the applicants and forcibly evicted them from the matrimonial home. Fearing for their lives, the applicants took shelter at a neighbor's house and thereafter returned to the applicant No.1’s parental home in Dipka. Earlier, the applicants had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Learned Family Court, registered as M.J.C. No. 31/2013, seeking maintenance. By order dated 10.04.2015, the Family Court granted a total maintenance of Rs. 7,000/- (Rs. 5,000/- to applicant No.1 and Rs. 2,000/- to applicant No.2). As the amount was inadequate, the applicants preferred a Criminal Revision before the Hon’ble High Court, registered as Cr.R. No. 417/2015 (Smt. Kiran Jangde & Anr. vs. Guha Singh). The Hon’ble Court, vide order dated 25.10.2016, was pleased to enhance the maintenance to Rs. 13,000/- (Rs. 3 8,000/- for applicant No.1 and Rs. 5,000/- for applicant No.2). After nearly seven years, the applicants moved an application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. on 16.01.2023, registered as Cr.M.J.C. No. 01/2023 before the Family Court, seeking enhancement of maintenance to Rs. 20,000/- for applicant No.1 and Rs. 15,000/- for applicant No.2, primarily on the grounds of increased cost of living, inflation, and house rent. The Respondent is presently employed as a Senior Overman with South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Gevra Project, Katghora, District Korba (C.G.), and is drawing a higher salary with the passage of time. His gross monthly salary is Rs. 91,496/-, and his annual income as per Form-16 is Rs. 10,06,209/-. applicant No.1 had also filed a case under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, registered as Criminal Case No. 11/2023, which was dismissed by the Learned JMFC, Katghora, on 30.07.2016. An appeal was preferred before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, registered as Criminal Appeal No. 72/2016, which was also dismissed on 12.04.2017. 4. Being aggrieved, the applicant filed a petition before this Hon’ble Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., registered as Cr.M.P. No. 963/2017 (Kiran Jangade vs. Guha Singh & Ors.), seeking monetary and consequential relief, including separate residence under the Act, 2005. The learned Family Court, while deciding the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants, though allowed the application, failed to consider the actual income of the Respondent and the genuine expenses incurred by the applicants, despite the material and evidence available on record. 4 Consequently, the Court awarded a sum of Rs. 19,000/-, which is inadequate. Therefore, the amount granted by the learned Court below is liable to be enhanced, and the impugned order dated 24.01.2024 is liable to be modified. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that there is no dispute that the applicants are entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and are currently receiving a sum of Rs. 13,000/- per month pursuant to the order dated 25.10.2016 passed by this Court. The learned Family Court, while deciding the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C., though allowed the same, but failed to appreciate that the said application for enhancement of maintenance was preferred after a lapse of nearly seven years. During this period, the circumstances of the applicants have significantly changed, particularly due to the substantial rise in the cost of living. The applicants are now residing in a rented accommodation, paying Rs. 10,000/- per month as rent. applicant No.2, the daughter, is pursuing higher education, which involves increased academic and daily expenses. To meet their essential needs, the applicants have been financially dependent on applicant No.1’s father, who is now retired and suffering from age-related health issues, and is no longer in a position to provide further support. It is pertinent to mention that the applicants were earlier residing with applicant No.1’s parents, but due to family and health issues and her father's retirement, they were compelled to move into a separate rented house. The Family Court failed to consider this critical fact while determining the quantum of maintenance. The 5 Court adopted an overly technical and unwarranted approach in assessing the applicants' daily living expenses and did not account for the daughter’s growing needs related to education, clothing, and other necessities. The amount of Rs. 19,000/- awarded is, therefore, highly inadequate, unreasonable, and inconsistent with the standard of living that the applicants were entitled to in the matrimonial home. 6. Furthermore, the respondent has a sufficient and stable source of income from both his employment and agricultural land. However, the learned Family Court failed to evaluate his financial capacity accurately and reasonably. It is also submitted that the respondent deliberately concealed his true income, and the learned Judge failed to conduct a proper inquiry or investigation to ascertain the actual earnings of the respondent. The applicants have no independent source of income and are entirely dependent on the respondent for their livelihood. It is the legal and moral duty of the husband to maintain his wife and children in accordance with his standard of living. The applicants are also legally entitled to live in a separate residence with dignity and self-respect, without having to rely on the support of applicant No.1’s elderly and ailing parents. 7. As such, the impugned order dated 24.01.2024 is liable to be modified. The maintenance awarded is wholly insufficient to meet the applicants’ basic and necessary requirements, and the continued inadequacy of support would result in grave hardship and mental
Decision
agony to them. In view of the above, the applicants respectfully pray that the maintenance amount be enhanced to Rs. 20,000/- for applicant No.1 and Rs. 15,000/- for applicant No.2. The impugned 6 order passed by the learned Judge is highly inadequate, unjustified, incorrect and improper and bad in law as well as facts on record, as such liable to be modified. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the Family Court after considering all the documents and evidence adduced by the parties has passed the order, in which no interference is called for. 9. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. From perusal of the impugned order dated 24.01.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Camp Court, Kathghora, District - Korba (C.G.) in Criminal M.J.C No. 01/2023, whereby the learned Family Court partly allowed the application under Section 127 of the CrPC filed by the applicants for enhancement of the maintenance amount, and directed the respondent/husband to pay amount of Rs. 10,000/- per month to applicant No.1/wife and Rs. 9,000/- to applicant No.2/daughter. 11. Considering the evidence available on record and the pleadings of the parties, the order passed by the learned Family Court with respect to applicant No.1/wife is just and proper, warranting no interference by this Court. 12. However, so far as applicant No.2 who is the minor daughter of the applicant No.1 and respondent, and she is required to be maintained by the respondent who is her natural father, hence, it is 7 directed that the respondent to pay Rs. 5,000/- towards the maintenance of applicant No.2, namely, Ku. Nidhi, in addition to the amount earlier awarded by the concerned Family Court. The said amount shall be paid to the applicant No. 2 through her natural guardian, Smt. Kiran Jangde, in accordance with law. Thus, the maintenance amount of Rs. 9,000/- per month granted to the applicant No.2 by the learned Family Court is enhanced to Rs. 14,000/- per month. Hence, the impugned order dated 24.01.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Camp Court, Katghora, District - Korba (C.G.) in Cr. M.J.C. No. 01/2023, with respect to the applicant No.2, is hereby modified. The criminal revision is partly allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the concerned Family Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice 13. 14. Preeti