1 2026:CGHC:5359 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 811 of 2024 Krishna Kumar Armo S/o Bhulan Ram Armo Aged About 30 Years R/o Village - Chanderpur, Police Station, Tahsil And District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus Bund Kunwar D/o Balmukund Aged About 25 Years R/o Village - Salka, Police Chowki - Salka (Umeshwarpur), P.S. And Tahsil Premnagar, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ram Vifal Ram Rajwade, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30 /01/2026 1. Heard Mr. Ram Vifal Ram Rajwade, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The present criminal revision has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 02.03.2024 passed by the learned Family Court Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No.56/2022, AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 whereby learned Family Court partly allowed the application under Section 125 CrPC filed by the respondent and directed the applicant to pay of Rs.2,500/- per month to the respondent towards maintenance. 3. It transpires from the report of Registry that the present criminal revision barred by 34 days of delay and application for condonation of delay in filing the present revision is not filed on behalf of the applicant. 4. On perusal of the record, it is evident from the report of the Registry that the present criminal revision has been filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation. Despite the defect being pointed out, no application for condonation of delay under the relevant provisions of law has been filed by the applicant explaining the delay in filing the revision. 5. It is well settled that a petition or revision filed beyond the period of limitation cannot be entertained unless the delay is satisfactorily explained by filing an appropriate application seeking condonation of delay. In absence of such an application, the Court has no jurisdiction to condone the delay. 6. In the present case, neither any explanation for the delay has been placed on record nor any prayer has been made seeking condonation of delay. Consequently, the revision suffers from defect of limitation. 7. Accordingly, the revision is hereby dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. Sd Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil