Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Gujarat · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8140 (GUJ)

NAIMESHKUMAR VIPULBHAI PADHYA v. STATE OF GUJARAT

CR.MA/16882/2025 · 2025-09-25

R T Vachhani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

R/CR.MA/16882/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 16882 of 2025 In F/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 32265 of 2025 ========================================================== NAIMESHKUMAR VIPULBHAI PADHYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR. HARSH M UPADHYAY(17556) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 25/09/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. By way of the present application, the Applicant seeks condonation of a delay of 64 days in filing the captioned revision application, challenging the order dated 05.03.2025 passed by the Family Court, Vadodara in Criminal Misc. Application (New) No.693 of 2024 (Criminal Misc. Application (Old) No.222 of 2023), wherein the Family Court was pleased to direct the Applicant – husband to pay Rs.10,000/- to Respondent No.2 – wife, from the date of application, being 08.06.2023. 2. This Court has heard the learned advocate for the Applicant. It transpires that Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 have been duly served with the notice, but none have appeared before this Court. R/CR.MA/16882/2025 ORDER DATED: 25/09/2025 3. The Applicant is directed to deposit 50% of the arrears amount before the Registry, after deducting any amount already paid, if applicable, and to place the receipt of such deposit on record on or before 11.10.2025. 4. Having considered the submissions advanced and the grounds stated in the delay condonation application, this Court is of the opinion that the delay of 64 days is not unduly prejudicial. Hence, subject to the production of the deposit receipt as directed above, the delay of 64 days is hereby condoned, without entering into much technicalities. 5. The Registry is directed to assign a regular number to the captioned revision application and to list the matter in its regular course (seriatim), subject to the production of the receipt as directed hereinabove. 6. Failure to comply with the above directions shall render this order inoperative and shall not preclude the concerned Court from proceeding further with the matter in accordance with law. Sd/- . (R. T. VACHHANI, J) MVP Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 26/09/2025 16:07:06