Bombay High Court
Mahendra S/O Deoraoji Jaunjal vs Vaishali W/O Mahendra Jaunjal And ... on 16 September, 2022
Bench: V. G. Joshi
1 3wp609.22
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 609/2022
(Mahendra S/o Deoraoji Jaunjal Vs. Vaishali W/o Mahendra Jaunjal & anr.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. R. A. Biranware, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. R. Kadu, Advocate for respondent No.1.
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J.
DATED : 16/09/2022.
Heard.
2. The petitioner/husband has raised challenge
to the order dated 21.05.2019 passed by the
Magistrate in the proceeding under the Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act ('D.V. Act'), by
which the learned Magistrate has granted interim
maintenance vide order dated 21.05.2019. The
second challenge is to the order dated 16.10.2019, by
which the Civil Judge, Senior Division has granted
interim maintenance in terms of Section 24 of the
Hindu Marriage Act in HMP No. 169/2019.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No.2 wife has suo motu appeared and
brought to the notice that so far as the first challenge
to the interim maintenance order is concerned,
already the same petitioner has filed criminal
application (APL) No. 1329/2019 in this Court, which
was heard and dismissed on merits by this Court vide
2 3wp609.22
order dated 02.03.2021. As regards to the second
challenge, (obviously which cannot be subject matter
of criminal writ petition) the petitioner has already
challenged the same before the District Court by filing
Miscellaneous Civil Appeal and the same is pending.
The copy of the judgment of this Court dated
02.03.2021 and a copy of delay condonation
application No. 33/2019 along with Miscellaneou Civil
Appeal challenging the interim maintenance order in
HMP proceeding have been tendered. Apparently, the
petitioner-husband has suppressed from this Court
that the first prayer which he is seeking, was already
challenged to this Court, in which he became
unsuccessful. For second prayer, he has already filed
Miscellaneous Civil Appeal along with delay
condonation application in the Court of competent
jurisdiction which is informed to be pending.
4. It emerges a serious affair on the part of the
petitioner who is apparently trying to mislead the
Court to obtain the orders. This Court presume and
suppose that the learned counsel for the petitioner was
unaware about the mischievousness of the petitioner.
However, it is his duty to verify the factual aspect and
endevour to assist the Court properly. At this
juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner
realizing the facts, requested for withdrawal of the
petition. Since the petition lacks bonafide as well as
endeavoured to mislead the Court, he has to pay cost
for his dishonesty.
3 3wp609.22
5. Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. The
petitioner is directed to pay cost of Rs. 20,000/- to the
High Court Legal Services Sub Committee, Nagpur.
The cost amount shall be deposited within one week
from today.
6. Stand over after one week for compliance.
(VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Gohane
JITENDRA
BHARAT
GOHANE
Digitally signed by
JITENDRA BHARAT
GOHANE
Date: 2022.09.16
18:47:22 +0530
