Chhattisgarh High Court
CRR/1440/2026 of IMRAAN KHAN Vs BIWI AMBAR AAFREEN on 15 October 2026
2026:CGHC:44888
2026:CGHC:44888 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1440 of 2026 Imraan Khan S/o Late Ikraam Khan, Aged About 26 Years Bussiness R/o Village Kotri Khan Traders, Thana And Tehsil Sarangarh, District Sagangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - Biwi Ambar Aafreen W/o
CGHC010411212026
2026:CGHC:44888
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No. 1440 of 2026
Imraan Khan S/o Late Ikraam Khan, Aged About 26 Years Bussiness R/o Village Kotri Khan Traders, Thana And Tehsil Sarangarh, District Sagangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
1 - Biwi Ambar Aafreen W/o Imraan Khan, Aged About 24 Years R/o Madhuban Para Ward No. 10 Thana - City Kotwali, Raigarh Tehsil And District Raigarh (C.G.)
2 - Minor Ikra Fateema, S/o Imraan Khan Aged About 1 Year 6 Months Through Her Guardian, Mother Biwi Ambar Aafreen W/o Imraan Khan, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Madhuban Para Ward No. 10 Thana - City Kotwali, Raigarh Tehsil And District Raigarh (C.G.)
...Non-applicants
For Applicant
:
Ms. Vidhi Matlani, Advocate
(Hon’ble Shri Justice
Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
)
Order on Board
16/10/2026
Heard.
1. The instant criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the legality and
Page 1 of 2
propriety of order dated 05.09.2026 passed by Family Court, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), in Case No.F-75/2026 (Biwi Ambar Aafreen & Anr. Vs. Imraan Khan), whereby the learned Family Court has granted interim maintenance in favour of non-applicant No.2 (minor daughter) to the tune of Rs.7,000/- per month.
2. Leaned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant has not specific source of income, rather he is working as Driver and earned monthly income of Rs.10,000/-. Despite that Rs.7,000/- monthly interim maintenance granted in favour of non applicant No.2 (minor daughter), which is on higher side. Hence, it is prayed that impugned order dated 05.09.2026 be set aside.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on record.
4. Upon a specific query being put to learned counsel for the applicant as to whether the applicant had filed an affidavit disclosing his income and expenditure, she submits that no such affidavit has been filed. It is further submitted that the applicant has not placed on record any document to substantiate his contention that he is working as a driver or to establish the particulars of the vehicle which he drives.
5. Having regard to the present-day cost of living and the expenses required for the maintenance, this Court is of the considered view that the award of interim maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per month in favour of non-applicant No. 2/minor daughter cannot be said to be excessive. Accordingly, this Court does not find any good ground to admit the instant revision petition.
6. Accordingly, this revision petition stands rejected. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge Vasant
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…