1 CGHC010321352026 2026:CGHC:36993-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2170 of 2026 Smt. Nikita Singh W/o Ajay Pratap Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o- At Present Village- Kawardha Road Bahera Bhavesh Rajput Dhaba, Thana Bemetara, Distt- Bematara (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Ajay Pratap Singh S/o Dilip Singh Aged About 31 Years R/o- Avika Vihar Colony Simga, Police Station Simga District- Balodabazar (C.G.) 2 - Dilip Singh Thakur S/o Late Jhumuk Singh Thakur Aged About 68 Years R/o Avika Vihar Colony Simga, Police Station Simga District- Balodabazar (C.G.) 3 - Pushpa Bai Thakur W/o Dilip Singh Thakur Aged About 60 Years R/o Avika Vihar Colony Simga, Police Station Simga District- Balodabazar (C.G.) 4 - Deepika Singh Thakur W/o Rakesh Singh Thakur Aged About 37 Years R/o Tifra P.S. Sirgitti, Dist.- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Nandani Rajput W/o Late Pukhraj Rajput Aged About 38 Years R/o Laxman Nagar Police Station- Gudhiyari District- Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Rakesh Singh Thakur S/o Ramesh Singh Thakur Aged About 36 Years R/o Tifra P.S. Sirgiti, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bemetara, Distt.- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 6 : Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Advocate ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2026.08.19 17:27:26 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 19.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Samir Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Anusha Naik, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State as well as Ms. Madhunisha Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 to 6. 2. The present CRMP has been filed for modification of the order dated 15.04.2026 passed in CRMP No.673 of 2026 with the following relief:- “It is therefore, prayed that petition may kindly be allowed and the appropriate order for adjust the amount of Rs. 50,000/- may kindly be passed in the order dated 15.04.2026 by modifying the para 26 of the judgment passed in CRMP No. 673/2026, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the order dated 15.04.2026 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Cr.M.P. No. 673/2026, whereby the FIR, charge-sheet and consequential criminal proceedings against respondent Nos.1 to 6 were quashed, this Hon’ble Court, in paragraph 26 thereof, observed that petitioner No.1/husband would be entitled to refund of the amount of 50,000/- deposited before ₹ 3 the Mediation Centre. It is submitted that, pursuant to the order dated 10.03.2026, the said amount had been deposited by respondent No.1 before the Mediation Centre and the petitioner-wife, having appeared before the Mediation Centre on 06.04.2026, received the said amount of ₹50,000/-. However, after the order dated 15.04.2026, when respondent No.1 approached the Mediation Centre for refund, he was informed that the amount had already been withdrawn by the petitioner. Consequently, respondent No.1 approached the learned Family Court, Bemetara by filing an application dated 10.08.2026 seeking return of the said amount in view of the aforesaid order of this Court. 4. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is a deserted woman and is maintaining her minor daughter aged about six years and, in view of her financial condition, she is not in a position to arrange and refund the amount of 50,000/- to respondent No.1. It is therefore ₹ submitted that, instead of directing the petitioner to return the amount immediately, the said amount may graciously be permitted to be adjusted against the maintenance amount payable to the petitioner and her minor daughter in the pending maintenance proceedings before the learned Family Court, Bemetara, wherein an interim order has already been passed in their favour. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and is also willing to furnish appropriate security/surety, if so directed. It is, therefore, prayed that paragraph 26 of the order dated 15.04.2026 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 673/2026 may kindly be suitably modified and appropriate directions be issued for adjustment of the amount of 4 ₹50,000/- in the pending maintenance proceedings, in the interest of justice. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6 submits that proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. are already pending between the parties before the learned Family Court and, therefore, the amount of 50,000/- deposited by respondent ₹ No.1/husband before the Mediation Centre may appropriately be adjusted against the amount payable towards maintenance in the said proceedings. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the record as well as the impugned order dated 15.04.2026 passed by this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 673/2026. 7. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, particularly the fact that proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. are pending between the parties before the learned Family Court and that the amount of 50,000/- deposited by respondent ₹ No.1/husband before the Mediation Centre has already been received by the petitioner-wife, we are of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met if the said amount is permitted to be adjusted in the pending maintenance proceedings. Accordingly, the present Cr.M.P. deserves to be allowed. 8. Consequently, the request made by learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 6 for refund of the amount deposited by respondent No.1 before the Mediation Centre is not accepted. 5 Accordingly, paragraph 26 of the order dated 15.04.2026 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 673/2026 shall stand modified and, in place thereof, paragraph 26 shall be read as under:- “26. Petitioner No.1 shall not be entitled to seek refund of the amount of ₹50,000/- deposited by him before the Mediation Centre of this Court in compliance with the order dated 10.03.2026.” 9. With the aforesaid observations and modification, the present Cr.M.P. stands allowed. The order dated 15.04.2026 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 673/2026 shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. 6. A copy of this order be placed along with the records of CRMP No.673/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu