Advocates:
['SUNITA JAIN', '', 'PRATEEK SHARMA', 'RAJ KUMAR RASTOGI', 'A G', '', 'MANOJ PARANJPE', 'VAIBHAV A GOVERDHAN', 'VIKRAM DIXIT', 'PRIYANKA MEHTA']

1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Criminal Revision No. 796 of 2014

Order reserved on 07.01.2021

Order pronounced on 11.02.2021

Sandeep Kumar Prasad, son of J.N.Prasad, aged about 34

years, resident of Block No. 19, Plot No. 6, Nehru Nagar, Bhilai,

District Durg, at present Quarter No. B-20, Mahakali Colliery,

Post Babupet, Police Station and District Chandrapur

(Maharashtra).

---- Applicant

Versus

Smt. Reena Prasad, wife of Sandeep Kumar Prasad, aged

about 30 years, resident of near School Gurudwara,

Ambikapur, District Sarguja, CG

----Non-applicant

For Applicant

:

Ms. Pragya Pandey, Adv.

For Non-applicant

:

Ms. Priyanka Mehta, Adv.

CAV Order by Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor

The Order under challenge in this revision petition is the one

which was passed on 30.08.2014 by learned Family Court,

Ambikapur, District Sarguja in Misc. Criminal Case No. 04/2014

dismissing the application filed by the applicant/husband under

Section 126 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside

the ex parte order dated 17.08.2012 passed by learned Family

Court, Ambikapur in Misc. Criminal Case No. 01/2012.

2.

There is no dispute that the non-applicant herein namely Smt.

Reena Prasad is the legally wedded wife of applicant Sandeep

Kumar Prasad. The parties hereinafter would be referred to as the

wife and husband, for convenience.

2

3.

The facts leading to the disposal of this revision petition in

brief are that having been fed up with the frequent dowry

demands, indifferent attitude and the tortuous act of the husband

and his family members, the wife moved an application under

Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the

“Code”). The wife has pleaded in the application under Section 125

of the Code that being an un-employed woman, it is extremely

difficult for her to eke out the livelihood whereas the husband being

in the employment of WCL as foreman earns Rs. 40,000/- per

month, and therefore, let he be directed to pay a sum of Rs.

10,000/- per month as maintenance.

4.

The documents and order-sheets of the case go to show that

in spite of service of notice on the husband, he did not turn up to

appear in the maintenance proceedings. This non-appearance of

the husband made the Family Court proceed ex parte against the

husband by order dated 18.07.2012 and then after recording the

evidence of the wife allowed the application under Section 125 of

the Code in part vide order dated 17.08.2012 granting monthly

maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- in her favour. Meanwhile, the husband

challenged the ex parte order dated 17.08.2012 by way of Criminal

Revision No. 740/2012 filed before the High Court on 07.11.2012

and subsequently withdrew the same on 13.11.2013 with liberty to

file an application under Section 126 (2) of the Code. Thereafter, on

06.01.2014 the application under Section 126 (2) of the Code was

filed challenging the ex parte order dated 17.08.2012 by taking

innumerable grounds of the serious ailment of his father requiring

his constant vigil etc which rendered him incapable of appearing in

the Court. Learned Family Court vide order under challenge in this

revision dated 30.08.2014 however rejected the application filed by

3

the husband under Section 126 (2) of the Code by holding that the

same was barred by limitation and that he did not even file an

application for condonation of the delay occasioned in filing the

application under Section 126 (2) of the Code.

5.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the dismissal of the

application under Section 126 (2) of the Code is based on wrong

calculation of limitation period. As regards non filing of application

for condonation of delay, she submits that the husband was under

the impression that the limitation is to be counted from the date of

order passed by the High Court on 13.11.2013 in Criminal Revision

No. 740/2012, and in such