1 2026:CGHC:15069 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 37 of 2026 Ruchi Agrawal W/o Rahul Agrawal, Aged About 29 Years D/o Shri Natwar Lal Agrawal, R/o Near Gandhi Statue, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus Rahul Agrawal S/o Shri Prakashchand Agrawal, Aged About 28 Years Occupation- Business, R/o House No. 711, Mungeli Road, Kailash Dal Mill, Kududand, Bilaspur C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-tile taken from the Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Ankit Singhal through V.C. along with Mr. Ashish Mittal, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 01/04/2026 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by the petitioner seeking transfer of the Civil Suit No. 121A/2024 pending before the Court of Judge, Family court, Raigarh to any other competent jurisdictional Court within the Raigarh District. 2. The petitioner filed the instant petition pleading, inter alia, that owing JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.04.02 16:22:20 +0530 2 to disputes between the petitioner and her husband (respondent herein), the respondent moved the matrimonial proceedings before the learned Family Court, which came to be registered as Civil Suit No.121A/2024, which is pending. According to the petitioner, the administrative functioning of the Court has been seriously compromised by the conduct of the court staff (Prastutkar). It is alleged that the staff, in collusion with the respondent, has manipulated the court diary by fixing unnaturally short and consecutive dates, deliberately withheld and delayed the petitioner’s pleadings and written submissions, and interfered with the proper placement and consideration of interlocutory applications during hearings. It is further alleged that despite complaints made to the higher authorities, the staff acted in a retaliatory and hostile manner, thereby creating a prejudiced and hostile environment. On account of such continuous procedural irregularities and administrative interference, the petitioner has developed a reasonable apprehension that she will not receive a fair and impartial trial, necessitating transfer of the case. 3. In the said transfer petition, specific allegations were made by the petitioner that on the dates fixed before the learned Family Court, Raigarh i.e. 03.01.2026, 08.01.2026 and 19.01.2026, the Presiding Officer was not holding the Court; however, proceedings in the matter were drawn in the absence of the petitioner and such proceedings have been recorded behind the back of the petitioner, which has caused serious prejudice to her. 4. Today when the matter is called up for hearing, learned counsel for 3 both the parties jointly submit that the present transfer petition has become infructuous as the Presiding Officer who had passed the orders dated 03.01.2026, 08.01.2026 and 19.01.2026 has since been transferred and a new incumbent has already joined. 5. (a) At this juncture, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he has filed an application (I.A.No.2 of 2026) for taking documents on record. He would submit that the present petition has been filed on account of a bona fide apprehension of bias against the learned Presiding Officer before whom the civil suit of the petitioner was pending. It is submitted that on 03.01.2026, 08.01.2026 and 19.01.2026, the said court passed certain orders in the absence of the petitioner. It is further submitted that on 10.03.2026, this Court granted interim relief in favour of the petitioner and stayed the proceedings of Civil Suit No. 121A/2024 pending before the learned Family Court, Raigarh, till the next date of hearing. He further submits that the said fact was brought to the notice of the concerned Presiding Officer on the same day by the father of the petitioner along with Naya Mitra Shri S.R. Dansena at about 11:00 A.M., and the Court Reader of the said court had also informed that further proceedings in the civil suit had been stayed. It is further submitted that the Presiding Officer took up the court proceedings at about 12:00 noon and by that time he was fully aware of the fact that the proceedings had been stayed. (b) Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had also moved an application before the learned Family Court, Raigarh on the same day i.e., 10.03.2026, intimating about the stay granted by 4 this Court and also intimated that she will submit the copy of the order as and when it is available; however, the Presiding Officer at about 12 noon proceeded to decide I.A. Nos. 14 and 15 and passed order dated 10.03.2026, again at about 1.20 PM took up the matter and fixed the matter for hearing on 12.03.2026, on 12.03.2026 while considering the payment of maintenance made certain observations against the defendant/petitioner regarding non-acceptance of the maintenance amount. It is submitted that once the Presiding Officer had been informed about the order of this Court staying the proceedings of Civil Suit No. 121A/2024 by order dated 10.03.2026, he ought not to have proceeded with the hearing of the case, and therefore the order dated 10.03.2026 passed by the Presiding Officer is bad in law. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the application (I.A.No.2 of 2026) and the documents appended thereto. 7. When the matter was listed before this Court on 10.3.2026, after hearing the parties, notice was issued, which was duly accepted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. On the same day, the following interim order was passed : “ Taking into consideration the specific pleading as well as complaint lodged against the Presiding Officer vide Annexure P/6, purely as an interim measure, the proceeding before the learned Family Court Raigarh bearing Civil Suit No. 121A/2024, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.” 8. From the documents appended with the application, it is evident that 5 the interim order passed by this Court on 10.3.2026 was well within the knowledge of the learned Presiding Officer. Even on 10.3.2026 itself the petitioner herself also gave the information along with affidavit in this regard by writing with further submission that the copy of the order of this Court will be submitted as and when it is available. 9. Despite the said fact the learned Presiding Officer took up the matter on the same day and passed the order whereby the applications I.A. No.14 & 15 have been considered and passed the order. Again took up the matter at 1.20 pm and passed the following order : पश्चात् 1.20 मिनट :- आवेदक/ वेद द्वारा न्यायामित्र श्रीत् सी सिंसीघई उपस्थित् । अनवेदिदक/ प्रतित्वेदिदन अन$पस्थित् । अमि%वेक्त् श्री एसी०आरा० डनसीन न सी*चनकत्, क रूप . उपस्थित् हो0करा एक आवेदन पत्र वेस्त् ननया उच्च न्यायालया छत्तीसीगढ़ ति8लसीप$रा क आदशान$सीरा प्रकराण . अति; कया,वेहो तिगत् राखे जान 88त् या प्रतित्वेदिदन रूचिच अ;वेल क शापथ पत्र क प्रस्त्$त् तिकया। प्रकराण ननया उच्च न्यायालया छत्तीसीगढ़ ति8लसीप$रा सी गन आदशा क@ प्रतित् प्रस्त्$त् करान अथवे राजान क@ कया,वेहो, दस्त्वेजा प्रस्त्$तित् एवेA वेदप्रश्न होत्$ तिनयात् तिकया जात् होC। तित्चिथ प*वे,वेत् 12.03.2026 10. Again took up the matter twice on 12.3.2026 and passed the following orders : वेद सीतिहोत् न्यायामित्र श्रीत् सी सिंसीघई उपस्थित् । प्रतित्वेदिदन स्वेत्D उपस्थित्। 6 प्रकराण ननया उच्च न्यायालया छत्तीसीगढ़ ति8लसीप$रा क@ प्रतित् प्रस्त्$त् करान अथवे राजान क@ कया,वेहो अथवे दस्त्वेजा प्रस्त्$तित् एवेA वेदप्रश्न होत्$ तिनयात् होC। प्रतित्वेदिदन न एक आवेदन पत्र ननया छ०ग० उच्च न्यायालया ति8लसीप$रा क आदशान$सीरा प्रकराण . अति; कया,वेहो तिगत् राखे जान होत्$ या ननया छ०ग० उच्च न्यायालया क ट०प०सी० क० 37/2026 आदशा दिदनAक 10.03.2026 क@ वे8प्रतित् या शापथ पत्र प्रस्त्$त् तिकया गया। वेद न तिनवेदन तिकया तिक वेहो ननया न्यायालया द्वारा आदचिशात् भराण प0षण शाष राचिशा 30000.00 ( त्सी होजारा) रूपया प्रतित्वेदिदन क0 दन चहोत् होC। प्रतित्वेदिदन न उक्त् राचिशा अपन होथ . लन सी इंAकरा करात् हुए सी०सी०ड० . जा तिकया जान क तिनवेदन तिकया। प्रतित्वेदिदन द्वारा उक्त् राचिशा लन सी इंAकरा करान त्थ सी०सी०ड० . राचिशा जा तिकया जान क तिनवेदन करान सी प्रथ दृष्टया प्रत्त् हो0त् होC तिक प्रतित्वेदिदन क0 भराण प0षण राचिशा क@ आवेश्याकत् नहोL होC। ऐसी स्थितित् . प्रतित्वेदिदन क पक्ष . दिदनAक 24.09.2025 क0 अAत्रिरा भराण प0षण क सीA8A% . परिरात् आदशा तिनरास्त् तिकया जान परा तिवेचरा तिकया जा सीकत् होC। ननया छ०ग० उच्च न्यायालया ति8लसीप$रा क ट०प०सी० क० 37/2026 आदशा दिदनAक 10.03.2026 . ननया छ०० उच्च न्यायालया ति8लसीप$रा द्वारा इंसी प्रकराण क@ कया,वेहो आग सी$नवेई तित्चिथ त्क क चिलए तिगत् क@ गई होC। अत्D ननया छ०० उच्च न्यायालया ति8लसीप$रा क उक्त् आदशा क परिरापलन . प्रकराण क@ कया,वेहो ननया छ०ग० उच्च न्यायालया ति8लसीप$रा . आग सी$नवेई त्क क चिलए तिगत् क@ जात् होC। प्रकराण ननया छ०ग० उच्च न्यायालया ति8लसीप$रा क आदशा क@ प्रत्क्ष होत्$ तिनयात् तिकया जात् होC। तिनयात् दिदनAक - 27.03.2026 पश्चात् 4.15 8जा 7 प्रतित्वेदिदन न एक आवेदन पत्र 8स्त् वेद व्यथ भराण प0षण क@ राचिशा क0 सी०सी०ड . जा करान क तिनदQशा आवेदक क0 दिदया जान क सीA8A% . प्रस्त्$त् तिकया। जिजासीक@ नकल वेद क0 दिदलई गई। प्रकराण प*वे,वेत् 21/03/2026 11. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the documents filed along with the application (I.A.No.2 of 2026) and also the proceedings drawn by the learned Presiding Officer, it appears that despite knowing about the interim order passed by this Court by staying the further proceedings of Civil Suit No. 121A/2024 he has proceeded to continue to take up matter not only on 10.3.2026 (twice) and also on 12.3.2026 (twice) too and made certain observations/ comments in the matter. Once the proceedings of the said civil suit had been stayed by this Court, the learned Family Court ought not to have proceeded further in the matter. 12. Once a superior court (High Court/Supreme Court) passes an order of staying the further proceedings, the trial court becomes functus officio until the said interim order is modified/vacated, Therefore, the order dated 10.03.2026 on I.A. Nos. 14 and 15 and the order dated 12.3.2026 passed by the learned Family Court, Raigarh making observations regarding non-acceptance of the maintenance amount by the petitioner cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and the same are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the orders dated 10.03.2026 and 12.3.2026 passed by the learned Family Court, Raigarh are set aside and recalled. The learned Family court may 8 pass order on I.A. No. 14 & 15 afresh, in accordance with law and on its own merits. 13. In view of the fact that the Presiding Officer concerned has already been transferred and a new incumbent has joined, the present transfer petition does not survive for further consideration and stands disposed of accordingly. 14. In view of the above, the transfer petition is disposed off. 15. Looking to the conduct of the learned Presiding Officer, who has passed the orders dated 10.3.2026 and 12.3.2026 despite knowing about the interim order passed by this Court on 10.3.2026, the Registrar General of this Court is directed to summon explanation of the said Presiding Officer within a fortnight, as to why he has proceeded with the hearing of the matter, inspite of interim order by this Court was there, and place the same before Hon’ble the Chief Justice, on administrative side. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti/ Gowri