30. CRI. REVN. 128 of 2025.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.128/2025 Sau. Shilpa Amol Wankhade and another ...Versus… Amol Pralhadrao Wankhade - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ - Mr. G.R. Dhole, Advocate for applicants Mr. S.C. Reddy, Advocate h/f Mr. R.R. Bagde, Advocate for respondent CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J. DATE : 28/08/2026 1. The applicants have approached this Court challenging the order dated 11/06/2025, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Amravati below Exh.43 in Petition No.E-65/2022, rejecting the interim maintenance to the applicant/wife. The interim maintenance application was rejected on the ground that the proceeding itself is at the terminal stage and if the applicant/wife completes cross- examination of the respondent/husband, there is no necessity of passing any orders of interim maintenance as the final maintenance proceeding itself would be decided. 2. Mr. Dhole, learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the aforesaid order dated 11/06/2025 passed by the learned Family Court below Exh.43 on the application for interim maintenance is illegal and inasmuch as the power to grant any interim relief is at any stage of the proceeding and only because the proceedings were at final stage could not 2026:BHC-NAG:11389 30. CRI. REVN. 128 of 2025.odt 2 have been the ground for rejecting the application for interim maintenance. The learned Family Court has, therefore, committed an error in denying the right to the applicant/wife and the same therefore needs to be corrected by this Court under its revisional jurisdiction. Learned Counsel, therefore, prays for direction to the respondent/husband to pay interim maintenance to the applicant till pendency of Petition No.E- 65/2022, which is filed for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. Mr. Dhole, learned Counsel for the applicants further submits that the respondent/husband had filed an application (Exh.53) for passing no-cross order and the applicant/wife had filed an application (Exh.54) for grant of adjournment, as she wanted to challenge the order dated 11/06/2025 passed below Exh.43, before this Court. The application at Exh.53 filed by the respondent for no-cross order was rejected and application at Exh.54 filed by the applicant/wife for grant of adjournment was allowed, however subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- to be paid by the applicant/wife to the respondent/husband. He further submits that the said imposition of cost itself was illegal. The respondent/husband has not paid a single pie towards maintenance, even though the wife is living separately from her husband since the year 2022. The proceedings are filed in the year 2022 for grant of maintenance. Hence, the cost imposed upon the applicant by the Principal Judge, Family Court vide order dated 21/06/2026, below Exh.54, was illegal and the same may also be set aside. 30. CRI. REVN. 128 of 2025.odt 3 4. As against this, Mr. S.C. Reddy, learned Counsel holding for Mr. R.R. Bagde, learned Counsel for the respondent/husband strongly opposes the present revision application. Learned Counsel submits that only because of the non-cooperation of the present applicant, the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code could not be decided within time. He argues that the order dated 21/06/2025 was passed and the matter was adjourned subject to applicant paying costs of Rs.5,000/-. The matter is delayed only on the part of present applicant/wife. If the applicant/wife had not challenged the impugned order, the proceeding itself could have been concluded by now by the Family Court. The impugned order, therefore, is just and proper and is liable to be maintained. 5. However, upon instructions, the learned Counsel for the respondent/husband states that the respondent/husband is ready to show his bona fides by depositing lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/- towards maintenance, if the same is calculated and permitted to be deducted from the final maintenance amount, if the same is granted by the learned Family Court, Amravati and in case the Family Court rejects the application for maintenance, the same shall be returned back by the applicant/wife to the respondent/husband. 6. Thus, taking into consideration that the order below Exh.43 is passed only keeping in mind that the proceedings were already at the final stage and was about to 30. CRI. REVN. 128 of 2025.odt 4 be concluded, it appears that the learned Family Court has rejected the prayer for interim maintenance. I do not see any error on the part of the learned Family Court, Amravati rejecting application (Exh.43) at such belated stage where the proceedings were about to be completed, particularly taking into consideration the voluntary statement made by the respondent/husband that amount of Rs.50,000/- will be deposited. I am inclined to pass the following order :- O R D E R (i) Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. (ii) However, the respondent/husband shall deposit amount of Rs.50,000/- in the Family Court within a period of one week from today. Upon such deposit of Rs.50,000/-, the same shall be allowed to be withdrawn by the applicant/wife by the Family Court, even without making any application. (iii) If such amount is deposited, Petition No.E- 65/2022, pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Amravati shall be decided by the learned Family Court expeditiously and not beyond a period of two months from the date of receipt of amount of Rs.50,000/-, deposited by the respondent/husband, as directed by this Court. (iv) The amount so deposited by the respondent/husband shall be adjusted towards final maintenance, if the same is granted to the applicant/wife. (v) The applicant/wife shall also give an undertaking to refund back the said amount of Rs.50,000/-, if application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed her is rejected by the Family Court. 30. CRI. REVN. 128 of 2025.odt 5 (vi) The present order is subject to the respondent/husband depositing the aforesaid amount as undertaken within one week before the Family Court, failure of which, shall result in cancellation of the order. (MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.) Wadkar Signed by: S.S. Wadkar (SSW) Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 31/08/2026 17:43:07