Jharkhand High Court
Balram Mahli vs Priti Kumari Mahli on 19 March, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No.268 of 2025
....
Balram Mahli ......Petitioner
Versus
1. Priti Kumari Mahli
2. The State of Jharkhand ......Opp. Parties
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate
Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, A.P.P
......
Order No.04/19.03.2025
I.A. No.2946 of 2025
I.A. No.2946 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for condoning the delay of 22 days in filing this instant
Criminal Revision Application.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner is employed in S.S.B and he is posted in Himachal
Pradesh and hence the delay of filing this Criminal Revision
Application may be condoned.
3. Learned APP and learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has
raised objection.
4. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and in
view of the averments made in Paragraph Nos.5, 6 and 7 of the
I.A. No. 2946 of 2025 the delay of 22 days in filing the instant
Criminal Revision Application is hereby condoned.
5. Thus, I.A. No. 2946 of 2025 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to implead
The State of Jharkhand as O.P. No.2 in this case in course of the
day and serve a copy of this Criminal Revision Application upon
the learned A.P.P.
7. Issue notice to the O.P. No.1 as to why this Criminal
Revision Application may not be admitted and/or disposed of at the
stage of admission itself and for which, requisites etc. under
registered cover with A/D as well as by ordinary process must be
filed within two weeks from today.
8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that a sum of Rs.10,000/- has regularly been deducted from his
salary to the bank account of the O.P. No.2. It is submitted that the
ex-parte order dated 01.10.2024 passed by the learned Court below
on mere assumption without filing any documentary evidence by
the Opposite Party No.2 and hence the impugned judgment may be
stayed till the appearance of the O.P. No.2.
9. Learned counsel for the State has raised objection and
submitted that the order has been passed in accordance with law.
10. Having heard learned counsel for parties and in view of
the fact that the impugned judgment has been passed ex-parte and
the O.P. No.1 i.e. the wife is getting regularly Rs.10,000/- per
month in the bank account from the petitioner and the order dated
01.10.2024 of enhanced amount of Rs.18,000/- is stayed till the
appearance of the O.P. No.2.
11. However, the petitioner shall regularly and continuously
pay Rs.10,000/- in the bank account of the O.P. No.2 and shall file
affidavit in this regard on the next fixed in this case.
12. Put up this case on 12th June 2025.
13. Call for the legible scanned copy of records from the
Court of Sri Syed Saleem Fatmi, learned Principal Judge, Family
Court Ranchi / or his successor Court.
14. Let the name of Ms. Saket Kumar, learned APP be
appeared in the daily cause list.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Nishant/-
