2026:CGHC:7104 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN CRR No. 725 of 2023 Ganeshram Verma S/o Fattelal Verma Aged About 32 Years (Wrongly Mentioned In The Impugned Order) R/o Vill. Chhechhar, Post - Marda, Tah. And P.S. Kasdol, Dist. Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.)

... Applicant(s)

versus

1 - Seema Verma W/o Ganeshram Verma Aged About 28 Years R/o Vill. - Chhechar, P.S. Kasdol, Dist. Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) Presently R/o Vill. Sarva, P.S. Kasdol, Dist. Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G)

2 - Bhumika Verma D/o Ganeshram Verma Aged About 4 Years (Minor) Through - Mother Seema Verma (Res. No. 1), R/o Vill. - Chhechar, P.S. Kasdol, Dist. Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) Presently R/o Vill. Sarva, P.S. Kasdol, Dist. Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G ... Non-applicant(s)

For Applicant : Mr. Purnchand, Advocate.

For Non-applicants : None.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

09.02.2026

1. Mr. Purnchand, learned counsel for the applicant on I.A. No. 01 of 2023, which is an application for condonation of delay of 50 days in preferring the instant criminal revision as well as on I.A. No. 02 of 2026, which is an application for condonation of delay in payment of process fee in preferring the instant criminal revision.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that the applicant has preferred the present revision petition before this Court against the order dated 31.01.2023 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Balodabazar District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), whereby partly allowed the application filed by the non-applicants and amount of Rs. 3500/- per month has been awarded towards maintenance to the non- applicants from the date of filing of application. It is further most respectfully submitted that the delay of about 50 days in filing the present revision, as well as the delay in payment of process fee, has occurred due to circumstances wholly beyond the control of the applicant. The applicant is a poor person suffering from epilepsy, requiring continuous medical treatment, due to which he has been unable to earn properly and has become financially dependent on his parents. Owing to his ill health and weak financial condition, he could not take timely steps for filing the revision and for depositing the process fee as directed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, though he has been diligently pursuing his legal remedies, including the pending First Appeal (Matrimonial) bearing FA(MAT)/167/2023. The delays are neither intentional nor deliberate but bona fide and attributable to genuine health and financial hardships; the process fee has since been paid. It is therefore prayed that both delays be kindly condoned in the interest of justice so that the matter may be adjudicated on merits.

3. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant as also perused the application for condonation of delay in preferring the instant criminal revision.

4. The primary question that arises for consideration before this Court is whether the delay of about 50 days in preferring the present revision petition deserves to be condoned or not.

5. Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramkumar Choudhary, 2024 INSC 932, while considering the delay, issued some directions and observed as follows:-

“5. The legal position is that where a case has been presented in the Court beyond limitation, the petitioner has to explain the Court as to what was the "sufficient cause" which means an adequate and enough reason which prevented him to approach the Court within limitation. In Majji Sannemma v. Reddy Sridevi, 2021 SCC Online SC 1260, it was held by this Court that even though limitation may harshly affect the rights of a party, it has to be applied with all its rigour when prescribed by statute. A reference was also made to the decision of this Court in Ajay Dabra v. Pyare Ram, 2023 SCC Online 92 wherein, it was held as follows:

"13. This Court in the case