IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 01.04.2026 BHAVIN CHAUDHARY ......Petitioner Vs.

SAHIL KUMAR CHAUDHARYn.;

.....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. P.S. Paul, Advocate for Mr. Arvind Pratap, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Mehak Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.

1. The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 23.03.2023 passed by this Court in CR-3033-2019. Relevant portion of the same is reproduced as under:-

“At this stage, learned counsel for the wife-mother states that the petitioner-husband-father has not cleared arrears on account of maintenance @ Rs.20,000/- per month awarded to the minor child. Learned counsel for the petitioner-husband-father on the other hand states that the petitioner has paid maintenance awarded to the minor child regularly and undertakes that in case there is any outstanding amount, the same would be cleared within two months from today. The statement of learned counsel for the petitioner-husband-father is taken on record and the petitioner-husband-father directed to clear the arrears if any within two months from today. Needless to mention, in case arrears of maintenance @ Rs.20,000/- per month as awarded to the minor child are not cleared within two months from today, the minor through his mother would be at liberty to take out appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law for seeking action for recovery of the same as also for violation of the orders of the learned Addl. District Judge, SAS Nagar, dated 21.01.2019 as upheld by this Court besides for breach of undertaking made before this Court.”

2. Learned counsel for respondent contends that in compliance of order dated 23.03.2023, affidavit of respondent dated 25.02.2026, has been filed. The same is taken on the record. A copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. A perusal of affidavit shows that petitioner herself is not accepting the amount of maintenance. The present contempt petition was filed in the year 2023, whereas the respondent is trying to comply with the order since the passing of order of learned Addl. District Judge, SAS Nagar, dated 21.01.2019. A perusal of para 7, as reproduced above, also shows that respondent submitted that he has already paid the maintenance awarded to the minor child.

4. The petitioner could not establish any willful, deliberate disobedience on the part of the respondent. Despite having due knowledge of the legal position, the petitioner chose to file present contempt proceedings and continued to pursue the same without any justifiable or tenable grounds of law. Such conduct amounts to gross abuse of the process of law and unnecessarily adds to the burgeoning pendency of cases before this Court.

5. Similar matter has already been dealt with by this Court in COCP-3579-2025 decided on 24.07.2025 titled as “Payal Chaudhary V/s KAP Sinha IAS and others”, while placing reliance on the judgments passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as “Dalip Singh V/s State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2010) 2 SCC 114, Subrata Roy Sahara V/s Union of India (2014) 8 SCC 470 and K.C. Tharakan V/s State Bank of India & Ors. passed in Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No(s).27458/2022”. The relevant paragraphs of Payal Chaudhary (supra) are reproduced as under:-

“9. It is evident that the petitioner has engaged in what can only be described as a frivolous and vexatious litigation spree, seemingly driven by a misplaced sense of grievance. Such conduct constitutes a gross abuse of the judicial process and contributes significantly to the burgeoning pendency of cases before this Court. The tendency of litigants to misuse the judicial forum by engaging in forum shopping, filing repetitive and meritless petitions, and adopting dilatory tactics undermines the very foundation of our legal system and clogs the administration of justice.

10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court,