Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010200252025 2026:GAU-AS:3947 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1066/2025 SAYED ALI S/O ALI HUSSAIN R/O VILL- SIMLABARI P.O. SIMLABARI P.S. BAGUAN DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM PIN-783129. VERSUS AZIDA KHATUN D/O ASRAF ALI R/O VILL- KALYANPUR P.O. BAGUAN P.S. BAGUAN DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM PIN-783129 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ROSHID, MS. T BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : MS. M K BROWN, AMICUS CURIAE, Linked Case : OTC/0/0 SAYED ALI GOALPARA Page No.# 2/3 VERSUS AZIDA KHATUN GOALPARA ------------ Advocate for : TASNINA BEGUM Advocate for : appearing for AZIDA KHATUN BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 18.03.2026 Heard Mr. A. Roshid, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent. This is an application praying for condonation of 688 days in preferring accompanying criminal revision petition. By the order impugned in the criminal revision petition, the petitioner was required to pay a sum of Rupees 4,000/- as maintenance to his wife and children on and from the date of passing of the order by the Judicial Magistrate First Class Goalpara i.e. on 21.06.2023. It has been submitted at the bar that the petitioner has not paid any amount till date. The only reason given for praying for condonation of the delay in preferring the present petition is that the petitioner did not contact his counsel and the counsel also failed to inform him. The Court is not satisfied with the Page No.# 3/3 grounds. The Court also not satisfied in the manner in which a maintenance granted by a competent Court of law has not been satisfied for 2 years from the date of passing of the order and then this Court has been approached and even when there is no order of stay, the respondent no. 2 has not been able to benefit from a successful litigation. In view of the above, this Court does not find the interlocutory application for condonation of delay deserving to be entertained. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. This interlocutory application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant