1 / 3 2025:CGHC:1133 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2188 of 2023 1 - Abhinav Soor S/o Dr. C.N. Soor Aged About 38 Years R/o 48/345, Bairan Bazar, Thana - Kotwali, Raipur Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. Mob- 8518076707 ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Ojal Soor W/o Abhinav Soor Aged About 28 Years R/o House Number C-170, Shailendra Nagar, Near Gudimai Mandir, Tahsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh, Mob- No. 7477227792 ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Akhtar Hussain, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Parth Shrivastava, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 08/01/2025 1. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed for quahsment of the entire proceedings of the case No.1182/2019 pending before the 1st Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. which was filed by the respondent for execution of the order dated 21/05/2018 passed in M.J.C. No.96/18. 2. The brief facts of this case are that the respondent/wife has filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. on 16/02/2018 seeking ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.01.22 16:46:29 +0530 2 / 3 maintenance from the petitioner. The said application came to be registered as MJC No.96/2018. Thereafter, the First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur on 21/05/2018 granted interim maintenance of Rs.15000/- to the wife till the final decision of the case. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application under Section 125 (3) Cr.P.C. on 24/12/2019 alleging that pursuant to the order dated 21/05/2018 till November, 2018 in 18 months the husband has paid only Rs.1,61,000/- instead of Rs.2,70,000/- the said case was registered as MCC No.1182/2019 wherein the First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur recorded order-sheet on 11/04/2023 and rejected the application filed by the petitioner for cancellation of payment of interim maintenance. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the instant petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that since the main application for grant of maintenance has been rejected, therefore, the order of payment of interim maintenance would automatically stand dismissed. He would next contend that the respondent has suppressed the material facts regarding her income. He would, therefore, pray for quashment of the proceedings of MCC No.1182/2019. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would contend that since there is no order with regard to quashment of the order dated 21/05/2018 whereby the interim maintenance was granted, therefore, the petitioner is liable to make payment of the same and no interference is required by this Court. 3 / 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. From perusal of the documents and the orders it is apparent that the First Additional Principal Judge, Family Court Raipur has passed an order on 21/05/2018 and granted interim maintenance to the petitioner till the final decision of the case. Thereafter, the petitioner though initially paid the interim maintenance to the tune of Rs.1,61,000/-, however, subsequently he stopped the payment of interim maintenance against which the wife filed an application 125 (3) Cr.P.C. which is also pending consideration. 7. The case for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was finally decided on 29/04/2022 whereby the said application for grant of maintenance was rejected but the Court has not observed anything with respect to grant of interim maintenance and the said order having not been challenged by the petitioner before any Court and even the Court below has also not cancelled the payment of interim maintenance, the petitioner at this stage cannot question the same and cannot escape himself from making payment of the interim maintenance for the aforesaid period. 8. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case in view of the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief by this Court and the petitioner is directed to make payment of the entire arrears. Accordingly, the instant petition sans merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu