Section 125 of the CrPC is a social justice legislation aimed at preventing destitution, mandating that an able-bodied husband is under a moral and legal obligation to provide maintenance to his wife, regardless of allegations regarding her independent earning capacity or previous marital history, unless proven otherwise.

Order on Board

1. This Criminal Revision is filed against the order dated 22.12.2025 passed by the learned 2nd Addl. Principle Judge, Family Court, Raipur, whereby the learned Family court has granted maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent/wife.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the respondent/ wife filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Family Court at Raipur (Chhattisgarh) claiming maintenance of Rs. 3,00,000/- per month, asserting that the marriage of the respondent was solemnized on 01.09.2022 in accordance with social customs and traditions. This was the second marriage for both the applicant and the respondent, as their previous marriages had already ended socially. The applicant had been deceived in her earlier marriage, and therefore she was reluctant to marry again but on the assurance given by the petitioner/ husband, she marry again. However, from the very first night of the marriage, the respondent was subjected to harassment by the applicant and his family members in the name of dowry and she was pressured to bring Rs. 5,00,000/- from her parental home.

3. The applicant, in his reply, has partly admitted paragraphs 02 and 03 of the application and denied the remaining averments, contending that both parties entered into a second marriage without any issue being born therefrom, and that the respondent concealed the fact that she had not legally divorced her first husband, thereby rendering the present marriage void. It is further stated that the marriage was performed without any dowry demand and all expenses, including jewellery worth Rs. 7–8 lakhs, were borne by the respondent’s family, which the applicant later took with her. The applicant denies all allegations of cruelty, dowry harassment, and unnatural acts, asserting that the applicant lived in the matrimonial home for about four months, participated in social functions happily, and thereafter left without sufficient cause due to dissatisfaction with his low income, falsely implicating him and his family in criminal cases. He further submits that he is a simple accountant earning about Rs. 9,000/- per month, whereas the respondent/ wife is well-educated and earning through tuition, and that she has failed to produce any proof of divorce from her previous marriage despite claiming the same, thereby making false and baseless allegations only to claim maintenance.

4. After hearing the parties, learned Family Court has partly allowed the application filed by the respondent and granted Rs.10,000/- per month as maintenance which is payable from the date of application i.e. 15.06.2023. The order is under challenge in the present petition.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the respondent made false allegations of cruelty and unnatural offences and cohabited with him only for a brief period of about 3–4 months. The Family Court, upon adjudication, partly allowed the application and awarded maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month from the date of application. It is also stated that the applicant is working as a Munim (Accountant) earning Rs. 9,000/- per month and has disclosed his income in compliance with the judgment of Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) 2 SCC 324. The applicant alleges that the respondent has failed to produce any proof of divorce from her previous husband and has lodged false criminal cases under Sections 498A , 376, 377, 511/34 IPC only to harass him and his family. It is further contended that the respondent has been living separately since June 2021 without sufficient cause and, therefore, is not