Bilaspur : The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed a criminal revision petition seeking enhancement of maintenance awarded to a six-year-old girl from Raipur, holding that the Family Court’s order did not warrant interference.
Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha, in an order passed on February 9, observed that there was no illegality or infirmity in the decision of the Family Court that would justify revisional intervention.
The minor girl, represented by her 32-year-old mother, had challenged the October 10, 2024 judgment of the First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur. The Family Court had directed the father to pay Rs 5,000 per month as maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Before the High Court, the mother argued that the amount awarded was inadequate, especially as the child was studying in a private school in Raipur. She submitted that the monthly expenses towards the child’s education and extracurricular activities came to around Rs 35,000.
Counsel for the applicant further contended that the father had suppressed his true financial position. While he claimed to have lost his job during the Covid-19 lockdown and to be dependent on his parents, his Income Tax Returns for the previous three years allegedly reflected a total income of more than Rs 14 lakh.
The applicant also pointed out that although a lump sum of Rs 36.5 lakh had been paid to the mother as permanent alimony at the time of their mutual divorce in February 2020, there was no specific allocation made towards the daughter’s maintenance.
On the other hand, the father maintained that the amount of Rs 36.5 lakh, paid pursuant to a settlement before a Lok Adalat in 2019, was meant to cover the needs of both the mother and the minor child.
After examining the case record and hearing the submissions, the High Court noted that the Family Court had passed its order after considering witness statements and documentary evidence. It also observed that the lower court had taken into account the respondent’s financial circumstances before fixing the maintenance amount.
Concluding that there was no merit in the revision petition, the High Court dismissed the plea for enhancement of maintenance.
