1 / 2 62-A apl-1664-24 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO. 1664 OF 2024 Neha Vishant Sonone Vs. Vishant Samadhan Sonone ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Ved R. Deshpande, counsel for the applicant. Mr.Aditya D.Gabhane, counsel for the non applicant. CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J. DATE : 08/10/2025 1. The applicant has challenged the order passed below Exh.99 in PWDVA No.3 of 2015 rejecting the application to answer the interrogatories produced on record. 2. According to the applicant, the non applicant has not disclosed and suppressed the facts about the mother is getting pension and brother is also serving. There is no dependency upon him. Some assets are also not disclosed and therefore, interrogatories is filed on record. The trial Court considering the guidelines given in the judgment of the Rajensh Vs. Neha and anr. in Criminal Appeal No.730 of 2020 arising out of SLP (Cri) No.9503 of 2018, has rejected the application stating that affidavit about assets and liabilities is sufficient. The learned counsel appearing for the Kavita 2025:BHC-NAG:10475 2 / 2 62-A apl-1664-24 applicant has submitted that he has given false information about liability of his mother and brother, therefore before deciding the interim maintenance application, it is necessary to answer the interrogatories. 3. The learned counsel for the non applicant has stated that this is not the stage to answer the interrogatories, it will be decided at the time of final disposal of maintenance petition. 4. Heard both the sides. 5. This is the stage of granting interim maintenance. This court has remanded back the matter to reconsider the application filed by the applicant within the stipulated period. The applicant has filed this application which can be considered at the time of passing of final order for maintenance. As the non applicant has given the assets and liabilities on affidavit, the burden is on the non applicant to prove it. Considering the above said facts, the application stands disposed of. 6. All the contentions are kept open. JUDGE Kavita