Chattisgarh High Court
Praveen vs Smt. Preeti on 10 August, 2022
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WP227 No. 302 of 2022
1. Praveen S/o Anandrao Pawar Aged About 40 Years R/o Tapti Ward
Multai, Distt. Baitul (M.P.)
2. Pramila W/o Anandrao Pawar Aged About 61 Years R/o Tapti Ward
Multai, Distt. Baitul (M.P.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Smt. Preeti W/o Praveen Pawar Aged About 35 Years R/o Paragaon
Road Ward No. 04, Gariyabandh, P.S. And Distt. Gariyabandh (C.G.)
2. Minor Kushagra S/o Praveen Pawar Aged About 4 Years R/o Paragaon
Road Ward No. 04, Gariyabandh, P.S. And Distt. Gariyabandh (C.G.)
-----Respondents
For Petitioners - J.K. Gupta, Advocate.
For Respondents - None
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Judgment on Board
10-08-2022
1. This petition is filed against the order passed by the Additional Session
Judge, Gariyaband dated 08.03.2022 in unregistered criminal appeal
whereby appeal preferred by the petitioners against order dated
18.09.2018 passed in Miss. Criminal Case No. 130/2016 has been
dismissed on the ground of delay as there was delay of 14 months in
filing the appeal.
2. The respondents are wife and minor child of petitioner No.1. The
marriage between the petitioner No. 1 & respondent No. 1 was
solemnized on 03.05.2013 thereafter, the petitioners started harassing
the respondent No. 01 physically as well as mentally and started making
allegation that respondent No. 2 (Kushagra) is not their child. The
respondent No. 1 was ousted from the matrimonial house. Therefore,
she filed a case under Section 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 of Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against the present
petitioners. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gariyabandh vide
order dated 18.09.2018 allowed the interim application, for grant of
maintenance filed by the respondents and awarded Rs. 10,000/- and
Rs. 5,000/- to the respondent No. 1 and 2 respectively per month as
interim maintenance.
3. That order was challenged after 14 months and appeal was preferred
before Additional Session Judge, Gariyabandh and vide order dated
08.03.2022 same was dismissed on the ground of delay as without
assigning any sufficient cause, appeal was preferred after lapse of 14
months. It is observed by the Lower Appellate Court that in the
application ground of ailment has been taken but no such record or
document has been filed in support of application.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the
records. From the records it appear that the petitioners have challenged
the order of the interim maintenance granted by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate. The petitioner No. 1 is an advocate practicing in
State of Madhya Pradesh. The learned Trial Court has granted interim
maintenance whereas the main application is still pending before the
trial Court. The appeal was preferred after delay of 14 months without
assigning sufficient cause. I do not find any good ground to entertain this
petition. Consequently this petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
vaishali Judge
