Banamali Sethi And Others vs Basanti @ Basalata Sethi And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5024 Ori

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                                    RPFAM No.244 of 2017
                                     Banamali Sethi and others                   ....        Petitioner
                                                                 Mr. Jitendra Kumar Chhotray, Advocate
                                                                   on behalf of Mr. G.N.Sahu, Advocate
                                                              -versus-
                                     Basanti @ Basalata Sethi and another        ....     Opp. Parties

                                               CORAM:
                                              JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                                                          ORDER

                Order No.                                03.05.2023

                   6.          1.       This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2. Petitioner in this RPFAM seeks to quash the entire proceeding in Criminal Petition No.312 of 2012 and Crl. P. No.79 of 2017 pending in the court of learned Jduge, Family Court, Khurda.

3. On perusal of record, it appears that Criminal Petition No.312 of 2012 has already been disposed of vide Judgment dated 4th November, 2015 directing the Petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- per month to each of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 from the date of application, i.e., 18th December, 2012 along with other directions.

3.1 Criminal Proceeding No. 79 of 2017 has been filed under Section 127 Cr.P.C. by the Opposite Parties for enhancement of the maintenance amount.

4. Mr. Chhotray, learned counsel being authorized by Mr. Sahu, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that they SASANKA Digitally signed by SASANKA SEKHAR have no instruction in the matter and prays for withdrawal of the SEKHAR SATAPATHY Date: 2023.05.05 SATAPATHY 19:58:56 +05'30' RPFAM. A memo to that effect is also filed in Court.

// 2 //

4.1 It also appears that there is delay of 502 days in filing the RPFAM and Misc. Case No.435 of 2017 has been filed for condonation of delay. But, the delay in filing the RPFAM has not yet been condoned.

5. In view of the submission made and memo filed, the Misc. Case No.435 of 2017 as well as the RPFAM is disposed of as withdrawn.

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

s.s.satapathy