Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10631 (CHH)

SARITA SAHU v. LIKHENDRA SAHU

CRR/246/2026 · 2026-02-23

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:9549 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 246 of 2026 Sarita Sahu W/o Likhendra Sahu, Aged About 27 Years Presently R/o Village Mujgahan, Police Station Arjuni, Tahsil And District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus Likhendra Sahu S/o Narayan Sahu, Aged About 35 Years Occupation Businessman R/o Village Koliyamar, Police Station Tahsil And Post Gurur, District- Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. Rajkumar Pali, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The present revision has been filed by the applicants with the following prayer: “ It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and set-aside the impugned order dated 18/06/2025, passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Dhamtari (C.G.) in Misc. Cr.Case No. 67/2025 and direct the respondent to pay maintenance relates to the claim of petitioner, in the interest of justice. ” 3. The present criminal revision is beyond time as has been reported by the Registry. 4. From perusal of application for condonation of delay, it is apparent that the applicant has not given day to day explanation of inordinate delay of 132 days in filing the revision, as such, the revision is barred by delay and laches and is not liable to be entertained. 5. Considering the grounds raised in I.A. No. 01/2026, I do not find any RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 good ground to condone the delay of 132 days in preferring the revision. 6. Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2026 is rejected and consequently thereto, the revision is also dismissed. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar