Chattisgarh High Court
Shyam Prakash Mourya vs Smt. Doly Mourya on 13 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12175
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
NAFR
Digitally
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN CRR No. 368 of 2026
Shyam Prakash Mourya S/o Late Babulal Mourya Aged About 42 Years R/o
Ward No. 41, Patel Mohalla, Torwa, Police Station Torwa, Tahsil And
District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s)
versus
1 - Smt. Doly Mourya W/o Shyam Prakash Mourya Aged About 35 Years
R/o Ward No. 41, Patel Mohalla, Torwa, Police Station Torwa, Tahsil And
District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
2 - Ku. Kittu Mourya D/o Shyam Prakash Mourya Aged About 18 Years R/o
Ward No. 41, Patel Mohalla, Torwa, Police Station Torwa, Tahsil And
District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
3 - Ku. Kanak Mourya D/o Shyam Prakash Mourya Aged About 17 Years
Through His Mother Guardian Smt. Doly Mourya, R/o Ward No. 41, Patel
Mohalla, Torwa, Police Station Torwa, Tahsil And District Bilaspur
Chhattisgarh
---- Non-applicant(s)
For Applicant : Ms. Vijay Laxmi Soni, Advocate.
For Non-applicants : None.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
13.03.2026
1.By way of this revision petition, the applicant has prayed that this Court may kindly be pleased to allow the revision and further be pleased to set-aside the impugned order of maintenance dated 2 09.02.2026 (Annexure A-1) in the interest of justice.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the non-applicants, who are the wife and children of the applicant, filed an application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking maintenance to the tune of Rs.20,000/- per month, stating inter alia that the marriage between the applicant (hereinafter referred to as the "husband") and the non- applicant No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the "wife") was solemnized on 18.02.2005 according to Hindu rites and rituals. It was further alleged by the wife that after the marriage the husband started doubting her character and subjected her to cruelty and harassment in connection with demand of dowry. The wife also stated that the husband is engaged in the business of selling vegetables and earns about Rs.1000-1200/- per day and due to lack of financial hardship, she claimed maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month before the learned Family Court concerned.
3. The applicant/husband filed his reply denying the allegations made by the wife and stated that the wife herself left the matrimonial home without any sufficient cause and is presently residing with her parents. Before the learned Family Court, the wife examined herself as PW-1 and exhibited four documents in support of her case, whereas the husband examined himself as DW-1.
4. After considering the oral as well as documentary evidence available on record, the learned Family Court passed the impugned order dated 09.02.2026 (Annexure A-1), whereby awarded maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month (Rs.2,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.1,500/- per month each to the children). Being aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is being preferred.
3
5. Learned counsel for the applicant/husband submits that the impugned order of maintenance dated 09.02.2026 (Annexure A-1) passed by the learned Family Court is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the settled principles of law and procedure and the same suffers from material illegality and perversity, therefore it is liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court has erred in granting maintenance in favour of the wife despite the fact that the wife herself left the matrimonial home without any sufficient cause and the allegations levelled against the husband are false and baseless. It is also contended that the learned Family Court failed to consider the fact that the husband had made several attempts to bring the wife back to the matrimonial home and was willing to keep her with dignity, however the wife refused to reside with him. Therefore, he prays that the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, is liable to be set-aside.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order and other documents appended with criminal revision.
7. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the non-
applicants had filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Family Court seeking maintenance to the tune of Rs.20,000/- per month from the applicant. After hearing both the parties and considering the material available on record, the learned Family Court passed the order dated 09.02.2026, wherein it was observed that the non-applicant No.1/wife is residing separately from the applicant for sufficient reasons. Upon appreciation of the evidence and circumstances of 4 the case, the learned Family Court directed the applicant to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- per month to the non-applicant No.1/wife and Rs.1,500/- per month each to the non-applicant Nos.2 and 3, who are minor children, till they attain majority, thereby awarding a total sum of Rs.5,000/- per month as maintenance. Therefore, keeping in view the social status of the parties, their respective earning capacity, the number of dependents and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the maintenance amount awarded by the learned Family Court cannot be said to be excessive or unreasonable and this Court does not find any illegality, perversity or infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference in the present revision
8. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and also considering the findings recorded by the learned Family Court, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court. No interference is called for. The applicant has failed to raise any ground so as to warrant interference by this Court.
9. Accordingly, the criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.
10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the Family Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal