Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh v. Sukhchain Panagar S
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:36871 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1316 of 2023 1 - Smt. Binda Panagar W/o Shri Sudhchain Panagar Aged About 39 Years Occupation- Unemployed, R/o Village- Mohgaon, Thana- Pandatarai, Tahsil- Pandariya, At Present R/o Village Rabeli, Thana- Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 2 - Bholesh S/o Shri Sukhchain Panagar Aged About 16 Years Minor Through
Legal Reasoning
Mother Smt. Binda Ranagar, R/o Village- Mohgaon, Thana- Pandatarai, Tahsil- Pandariya, At Present R/o Village Rabeli, Thana- Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus Sukhchain Panagar S/o Shri Surjan Panagar Aged About 46 Years Occupation- Teacher, R/o Village- Mohgaon, Thana- Pandatarai, Tahsil- Pandariya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. D.K. Vishwakarma, Advocate. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 29.07.2025 Order on Board 1. 2. Heard Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. D.K. Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the private respondent. This Criminal Revision is being aggrieved of the order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the learned Family Court, Kabeerdham, District – 2 Kabeerdham (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. 141/2022, whereby the learned Family Court, parly 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/- (each) per month to the applicants. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the marriage of the applicant No. 1 and respondent was taken place on 22.06.1998 as per the custom prevailing in the Community at District - Kobeerdham and due to wedlock the two male child and 2 female child were born who were 19 years and 17 years of the age the children were residing with mother applicant No.1. After the marriage applicant started to resides at her matrimonial House along with the family members and after some time respondent started harassing her on 02.05.2015 and 30.09.2015 respondent beaten her badly after drinking the liquor and on 30.09.2016 ousted the applicant and her children thereafter the community meeting was taken place in which the respondent written the letter to not repeat such an act but there is no change in his behavior and on 24.12.2021 again beaten her ousted her son therefore a complaint is made to Police in 112 number and the police party for the purpose of safety of the applicant drop her at village raveli since the date she is residing at her mayka. The further averment in the application is that the respondent started harassing and abusing the applicant by consuming the liquor and since December 2021 did not taken any care applicants are residing with the Paternal relatives in the village Rabeli respondent has taken a loan in her name which is also not paid and he is working as Shiksha karmi (teacher) used to earn Rs 45,000/- per month and also having 5 acres of agriculture land from which earns Rs. 3 lakhs per annum so the applicants prayed for maintenance as the applicants did not have source 3 of income to maintain and the respondent having sufÏcient means and duty bound to maintained the applicants legally as well as morally being the husband and father of the applicants. 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 applicant 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/- (each) per month to the applicants. 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 respondent is working as Shiksha karmi (teacher) used to earn Rs. 45,000/- per month and also having 5 acres of agriculture land from which earns Rs. 3 lakhs per annum, but despite the said fact the learned Family Court has awarded a meager amount of maintenance of Rs. 4,000/- each to the applicants. 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 14.09.2023 passed by the learned Family Court, Kabeerdham, District – Kabeerdham (C.G.) in Misc. Cr. Case No. 141/2022, whereby the learned Family Court, parly 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 4 the allowance of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 4,000/- (each) per month to the applicants, 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 as well as original records be transmitted to the concerned trial Court within a week for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. 7. 8. 9. 10. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar