2026:CGHC:7156 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 532 of 2024 Purushottam Chauhan S/o Awadhram Chauhan Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Khoksa, (Nawadih), Post Khoksa, Police Station And Tahsil-

Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s)

Digitally AKHILESH signed by KUMAR AKHILESH DEWANGANKUMAR DEWANGAN versus Smt. Sarita Chauhan W/o Shri Purushottam Chauhan Aged About 25 Years (applicant Is Not Claimed That Sarita Chauhan Is Wife Of applicant), Aged About 25 Years, At Present R/o Village Gram Chhotedhaba, In The House Of Father Sahdev Chauhan, Post Gadhfuljhar, Police Station And Tahsil Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : None.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

09 /02/2026

1. The applicant has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 23.04.2024 passed by learned Family Court, Mahasamund, Link Court, Saraipali, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No.20/2023, whereby, the learned Family Court partly allowed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent and directed the applicant to pay Rs.2,000/- per month to respondent, towards maintenance.

2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this revision are that the respondent filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance, claiming that she is the legally wedded wife of the applicant and that their marriage was solemnized on 25.05.2021 according to Hindu customs and rites at Village Chhotedhaba. After marriage, she allegedly resided with the applicant at Village Khoksa (Nawadih) in a joint family. She further alleged that after two years of marriage, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the applicant and his family members in connection with dowry demands, and that despite lodging a written complaint on 11.02.2023 at Police Chowki Bhawarpur, no action was taken, compelling her to file the maintenance application. The applicant opposed the application contending that he is a driver with limited income, sufficient only for his own livelihood. He further asserted that he had earlier married one Khirodini Chauhan and that no lawful divorce has taken place between them, making her the legally wedded wife. Documentary evidence in support of the said marriage has been filed. It is further contended by the applicant that the respondent had earlier married Gautam Sagar and had not obtained a valid divorce from him. The alleged divorce relied upon by the respondent is on a Rs.100/- non-judicial stamp paper dated 09.03.2020, which, according to the applicant, has no legal validity.

3. During the pendency of the maintenance proceedings, counseling was conducted between the parties, but the same failed. The applicant claims that he was willing to keep the respondent with him, but the counseling failed due to intervention by the respondent’s father. A subsequent social meeting convened at the instance of the applicant also failed due to non-appearance of the respondent. The applicant further contends that no valid marriage was performed between the parties as required under Sections 5 and 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and therefore the respondent does not fall within the definition of “wife” under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Reliance has been placed on a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to assert that in the absence of a valid marriage, the respondent is not entitled to claim maintenance from the applicant. Hence, the revision.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court granting maintenance to the respondent is perverse, contrary to the provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C., and against the settled principles of law. The learned Court below failed to appreciate the material facts on record and passed the order without proper application of judicial mind, thereby rendering the order illegal and void ab in