Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:36851 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1271 of 2023 1 - Smt. Saeeda Khan W/o Harun Rashid Khan Aged About 21 Years R/o Akashwani Colony, Infront Of Jogi Banglow, Katora Talab, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Sehnoor Khan Aged About 09 Months, D/o Harun Rashid Khan, Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Saeeda Khan, R/o Akashwani Colony, Infront Of Jogi Banglow, Katora Talab, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Sehrin Khan Aged About 09 Months, D/o Harun Rashid Khan, Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Saeeda Khan, R/o Akashwani Colony, Infront Of Jogi Banglow, Katora Talab, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) versus ... Applicant Harun Rashid Khan S/o Late Gulam Rashool Khan Aged About 33 Years R/o At Present Address - OfÏce Assistant Registrar, Government Society, Joint Building, Dantewada, District South Bastar, Dantewada (C.G.). ---- Respondents For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Rahim Ubwani, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Suresh Tandan, Advocate. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 29.07.2025 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 1. 2. Heard Mr. Rahim Ubwani, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Suresh Tandan, learned counsel for the private respondent. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 10.10.2023 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. 681/2019, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicants for grant of maintenance, and 2 directed the respondent that he has to be pay the allowance of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the applicant No.1, and Rs. 1,500/- (each) per month to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the marriage between the applicant no. 1 and respondent took place on 07.01.2019 as per Muslim Rites and Rituals at Jagdalpur and out of the wedlock applicant no. 2 and 3 were born and are currently in custody of their mother i.e. applicant no. 1. After the marriage applicant no. 1 started living with the respondent at her matrimonial house and started her matrimonial life. As a result of the relationship between the parties twin daughters i.e. applicant no. 2 and 3 were born. During the time of marriage parents of the applicant no. 1 gave all necessary articles as per their capability to the applicant no. 1 and family members of the respondent. The said articles are in custody of the respondent. After the marriage the respondent started harassing the applicant no. 1 physically and mentally, he started saying her that he does not like her and also taunted her that her parents have not given him dowry. When the applicant no. 1 countered the statement of the respondent and said that her parents have given the articles as per their financial capabilities and they cannot give more Articles in addition, because they are having responsibility of One Daughter and Two Grand Childrens on them. In connection to this mother of the respondent Amina Begam used to hurled abuse with the applicant no. 1, as a result of which the applicant no. 1 got mentally abused. While the applicant no. 1 was residing at her matrimonial house, respondent and her mother streaked the applicant no. 1 and they also never made any arrangement for the food of applicant no. 2 and 3 and they continuously used to torture the applicant no. 1 physically and mentally in the name of dowry, this very fact was told by the applicant no. 1 to her parents and when they came to 3 know about all this that the respondent along with her mother is torturing the applicants, then they took them to their house and since then the applicants are residing at the house of the parents of applicant no. 1. The applicant no. 1 has lodged a complaint at Police Station Dantewada in connection to the cruelty done by the respondent reacting upon which the police has lodged an FIR on the complaint made by the applicant no. 1 for the offences punishable under Section 323 and 498-A of IPC and at present the investigation is going on in the above said matter. The applicant no. 1 has filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC along with the application for interim maintenance on 04.07.2019. 4. The respondent herein has filed the reply to the said application and has denied the averments raised by the applicant. The learned Family Court has recorded the statement of the parties. The witnesses were examined before the learned Family Court including the applicant and the respondent. The learned Family Court by passing the impugned order, has partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicants for grant of maintenance. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the impugned order is contrary to the facts, law and circumstances of this case. It is further submitted that the learned family Court ought to have appreciated the fact that the applicant No.2 and 3 are infants aged about 9 months and both of them are in custody of their mother and in Rs. 1,500/- per moth, it is very hard to maintain and food expenses of both the children.
Decision
Therefore, the impugned order is contrary to the facts, and the same is liable to be modified. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and supports the impugned order dated 10.10.2023 passed by the learned 4 First Additional Sessions Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. 681/2019, whereby the learned Family Court, partly allowed the application under Section 125 of the CrPC filed by the applicants for grant of maintenance, and directed the respondent that he has to be pay the allowance of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the applicant No.1, and Rs. 1,500/- (each) per month to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, and he further submits that there is no illegality and infirmity while passing the same, therefore, the instant revision filed by the applicant/complainant is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and from the perusal of the order of the Family Court, it transpires that no any good ground has been raised on merits by the applicants’ side, thus, 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. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. 7. 8. 9. 10. Rajshekhar Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice