2025:CGHC:12745 NAFR Digitally signed by VAISHALI VAISHALILUCKY LUCKY NAGARIA NAGARIA Date: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

2025.04.21 14:02:01 +0530 CRMP No. 919 of 2025 • A. Santosh S/o Late Shri A. Chandrashekhar Rao Aged About

39 Years R/o 802/c Blok Royal City Borsi Durg District - Durg (C.G.)

... Petitioner versus

1. A. Rajni W/o Shri A. Santosh D/o Shri A. Kameshwar Rao Aged About 37 Years Posted As A Lecturer In Government Middle School Bharar Block Patan District - Durg (C.G.) R/o Care Of A. Kameshwar Rao Flat No. 404 Block - A Phase - 1 Anand Vihar Borsi Durg District - Durg (C.G.)

2. A. Ashana D/o A. Santosh Aged About 8 Years Through Legal Guardian Mother A. Rajni W/o Shri A. Santosh D/o Shri A. Kameshwar Rao Aged About 37 Years R/o Care Of A. Kameshwar Rao Flat No. 404 Block- A Phase - 1 Anand Vihar Borsi Durg District - Durg (C.G.)

... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Curtis Collins, Advocate For Respondents : None.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma

Order on Board

18/03/2025

1. The present criminal revision arises out of the order dated

29.01.2025 passed by the learned First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.) in case M.J.C. No. 126/2019, wherein respondents have file in interim application in support an affidavit for the Court order dated 17.05.2024, the learned Family Court without going to the factual situation and the material fact and documentary evidence dismissed the application.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the respondent was given an opportunity again by the (Previous Presiding Officer) of the family court to file an affidavit in accordance with the guidelines and directions issued by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh vs Neha on dated 17.05.2024, the Family Court was consider enough to give an opportunity to comply with the guidelines despite of the fact that the proceeding u/s 340 Cr.P.C. is pending against the respondent for Suppression of material facts, the above mentioned facts can be observed by the perusal of order sheet dated 17.05.2024. The respondent no.1 filed an affidavit in accordance with guidelines the supreme Court in Rajnesh vs Neha in the affidavit submitted by the respondent has not disclosed her assets and once again suppressed material facts and which has laid to filling of false affidavit before the family court which is contravention of the parameters fixed by the Hon'ble supreme court which categorically puts stipulation in para 72.8 the operative part of para 72.8 runs as under the pleading made in the applications for maintenance and relies filed should be responsible pleadings if false statement and misrepresentation are made, the court may consider initiation of proceeding u/s 340 of Cr.P.C. and for contempt of court. the petitioner filed an application on dated 15.10.2024 before the court for the contempt action against the willful disobedient of court order and suppression of material facts with support of false affidavit which laid to offence u/s 227, 229, and 246 of BNS for the reason that the affidavit filed in accordance with the Supreme Court guidelines on dated 27.05.2024 has been presented by suppressing material fact that the respondent has purchased flat and the flat has been registered through a sell deed on dated 18.10.2023 for a consideration amounting to rupees 22,50,000/-

3. That the application for contempt and willful disobedient of the court order and filling of false affidavit which leads to offence u/s 227, 229 and 246 of BNS has been filed by the petitioner on dated 15.10.2024 along with affidavit and the respondents has filed reply on dated 16.12.2024. The court below on dated 29.01.2025 deciding the above mentioned application and while deciding the application passed the impugned order dated 29.01.2025 has not been considered on the accordance with the imperative command of the Supreme Court but the order is passed on the basis of conjuncture and sermisess which cannot be termed as substantial finding of fact the operative part o