IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.156 of 2022 ====================================================== Md. Kaisher Khan S/O Md. Ratque Khan Resident Of Mohalla - Line Bazar, (Kasai Tola), P.O. - Purnea, P.S.- K. Hatt, District - Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Sabana Perween D/o Zamil Akhtar, W/o Md. Kaisher Khan Mohalla - Mirchaibari, Officer Coloney, Near House of Haji Shamim, P.S.- Katihar Sahayak, District - Katihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghvendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13 18-08-2026 The present criminal revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 16.06.2016, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Katihar in Maintenance Case No. 226 of 2012, whereby learned Family Court has directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 4,000/- per month to the O.P. No. 2/wife towards her maintenance. 2. I.A. No. 01 of 2025 has been filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay of 5 years 5 months 12 days in filing the present revision petition submitting that he was suffering from jaundice from 15.08.2016 to 28.02.2020 and after improvement in the health condition, he collected the money and then contacted his Advocate on 25.03.2025. But due to Patna High Court CR. REV. No.156 of 2022(13) dt.18-08-2026 2/3 Covid-19, the present revision petition could not be filed in time. 3. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner for condonation of inordinate delay of 5 years 5 months 12 days. The impugned maintenance order was passed long back in the year of 2016, whereas Covid-19 broke out in the year, 2019. In these three years, this criminal revision petition was not filed by the petitioner and thereafter, it was filed on 26.02.2022 after Covid-19. It is nothing but harassment of the O.P. No. 2/wife, who has no means to survive. 4. I considered the submissions advanced by both the parties and perused the material on record. 5. I find that the impugned order has been passed long back on 16.06.2016 long before Covid-19 broke out. However, the petitioner is taking plea that he was suffering from jaundice. But jaundice does not prolong for such a long period, nor is any medical evidence annexed with the application for condonation of delay in regard to the jaundice he has suffered. 6. Hence, in view of inordinate delay in filing the present revision petition, this Court is not persuaded to condone the aforesaid delay. Patna High Court CR. REV. No.156 of 2022(13) dt.18-08-2026 3/3 7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as time barred. shoaib/- (Jitendra Kumar, J) U T