1 2026:CGHC:23413 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 607 of 2026 • P. Amit Kumar Naidu, S/o- Late P. Madhusudan Rao Aged About 42 Years R/o- Near Muktidham Chowk, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. Smt. P. Padmawati Naidu W/o- P. Amit Kumar Naidu, Aged About 43 Years R/o- Janta Qr. No. 262, Tilak Nagar, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. P. Harshit Naidu (Minor) S/o- P. Amit Kumar Naidu, Aged About 2 Years On Behalf Of Res. No. 02 Smt. P. Padmawati Naidu, Mother And Natural Gaurdian, R/o- Janta Q R. No. 262, Tilak Nagar, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3. P. Kanishka Naidu (Minor) S/o- P. Amit Kumar Naidu, Aged About 2 Years On Behalf Of Res. No. 03 Smt. P. Padmawati Naidu, Mother And Natural Gaurdian, R/o- Janta Q R. No. 262, Tilak Nagar, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Juhi Anguriya, Advocate For Respondents : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 21.05.2026 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Section 227 of Constitution of India against the order dated 28.04.2026 BHUMIKA ANGARE Digitally signed by BHUMIKA ANGARE Date: 2026.05.21 16:34:45 +0530 2 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned Fourth Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur (C.G.) in Case No. 393/2024 by which the petitioner's right to cross-examine the witness/plaintiff's wife has been denied on the pretext that sufficient opportunity has been granted and the fact that the petitioner who was present before the Court was available to lead any evidence. 2. Learned trial Court has also taken note of the fact that the counsel engaged by the petitioner was suffering from illness and three four opportunities were granted to him but said opportunity has not been availed by the petitioner for the reasons best known to him, thus trial Court has closed the right of the petitioner to lead evidence and fixed the matter for respondents evidence on 23.05.2026. 3. Considering the fact that cross examination is the basic necessity to illicit the truth or to find out correct factual matrix of the case and, if an opportunity for cross examination is not given to the petitioner that will be against the principles of natural justice and fair play. Keeping this aspect of the matter, an opportunity is given to the petitioner to examine evidence of the respondents. 4. The proceedings of 23.05.2026 be deffered for two weeks and in the meanwhile learned Fourth Additional Principal Judge will fix the matter for cross examination of the respondents evidence on the date to be notified by the trial Court. It is also directed that the petitioner shall forward a copy of this order to the plaintiff's wife today itself and acknowledgment be also obtained and placed before the trial Court. In absence of non supply of copy, the order passed by this Court will not be given any effect and the matter will 3 be taken up for hearing on 23rd May, 2026 for respondents evidence. 5. Since this Court has passed the order in absence of respondents, therefore, the respondents are at liberty to revive this petition, if exigency so arises. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. 7. Certified copy today itself. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Bhumika