1 2026:CGHC:3936 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1145 of 2023 Ajeet Jha Son Of Dhariykant Jha, Aged About 48 Years Residence Of Makan Number 7h, Housing Board Colony, Rampur, Korba, Thana Tahsil And District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Samita @ Sabita Jha Son Of Shri Ajeet Jha, Aged About 45 Years Residence Of Ntps Gate No.03 Ke Paas, Prgati Nagar, Darri Thana Darri, Tahsil Katghora, District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Minor Anukush Jha Son Of Shri Ajeet Jha, Aged About 8 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Samita @ Sabita Jha Son Of Shri Ajeet Jha. Residence Of Ntps Gate No.03 Ke Paas, Prgati Nagar, Darri Thana Darri, Tahsil Katghora, District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. T.R. Patel, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22 /01/2026 1. The applicant has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 18.01.2022 passed by learned Family Court, Camp Court Katghora, District – Korba (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 82/2021, whereby, the learned Family Court partly allowed the application under Section 125 of CrPC filed by the respondents for grant of maintenance. 2. It transpires from the cause list that the present criminal revision is suffering from several defects and defaults. On 02.11.2023, when the matter was taken up by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the applicant was granted three weeks’ time to remove the said defects. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. Despite the lapse of a considerable period thereafter, the applicant has failed to remove the defects till date. The record further reveals that the present revision has been filed with a delay of 482 days. However, no application for condonation of delay, supported by a proper affidavit, has been filed on behalf of the applicant. 4. The applicant has shown complete negligence and lack of diligence in prosecuting the present revision. Even after availing sufficient opportunity granted by this Court, the defects have not been cured, nor application for condonation of delay has been filed to explain the inordinate delay in filing the revision. 5. It is well settled that a litigant who approaches the Court must do so with clean hands and due diligence. The negligence in prosecuting the present revision, coupled with the unexplained delay and persistent non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court, clearly attracts the doctrine of laches, thereby disentitling the applicant from any discretionary relief. 6. Accordingly, the revision is hereby dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. 7. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance, forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar