2026:HHC:16013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P. (M) No. 2091 of 2024 & Cr.MP No. 4077 of 2025 Date of decision: 12.5. 2026 Ved Prakash …Applicant. Versus Sapna Kumari & Others. …Respondents. Corum Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Applicant. Mr. Umesh Kanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.H.S. Rangra, Advocate. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge On previous date, Mr. H.S. Rangra had made following statement:- “Mr. H.S. Rangra, learned counsel for the respondents, submits that in view of final adjudication of the main petition preferred by respondents, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, awarding maintenance in favour of respondents @ Rs.20,000/- [Rupees Twenty Thousand] per month, present proposed Criminal Revision Petition and consequently present applications have become infructuous, because in the order sought to be challenged by the revision petitioner, monthly interim maintenance @ Rs.18,000/- [Rupees Eighteen Thousand] was awarded, which is lesser than the maintenance awarded in the main petition from the date of filing of petition before Trial Court.” 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes 2 2026:HHC:16013 Cr.M.P. (M) No. 2091 of 2024 2. On that date, learned counsel for the petitioner had sought time to have complete instructions. 3. Today Mr. Umesh Kanwar, Advocate has endorsed the submissions made by Mr. H.S. Rangra, Advocate with submission that if need arises petitioner would assail the final order passed by the Trial Court in the main matter. 4. Accordingly both these applications alongwith proposed Cr. Revision (Cr.Rev (FC) ST No. 11945 of 2024 and Cr.MP ST No. 9914 of 2024 are disposed being infructuous. (Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge. (Ranjan Sharma), Judge. 12th May, 2026 (Keshav)