1 CGHC010005222026 2026:CGHC:37564 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 126 of 2026 Shrimati Kishani Bai Sonkar W/o Sankarlal Sonkar Aged About 54 Years R/o- House No. 420, Sheetla Chowk, Gokulpur Ward Dhamatari, P.S And Tehsil And Dist. Dhamatari (C.G.) ... Applicant versus Shankarlal Sonkar S/o Late Ramhau Sonkar Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Gunderdehi, Sonkar Para Ward No. 05, Tehsil- Gunderdehi, Dist. Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant(s) : Ms. Priyanshi Dubey, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21 /08/2026 1. Heard Ms. Priyanshi Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. This criminal revision has been 9led by the applicant with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 14/07/2025 (Annexure RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 A/1) and grant Rs. 25,000 per month in favour of the applicant in the interest of justice.” 3. It transpires from the report of Registry that the present criminal revision barred by 81 days of delay and application for condonation of delay in 9ling the present revision is not 9led 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 9led beyond the prescribed period of limitation and no application for condonation of delay under the relevant provisions of law has been 9led by the applicant explaining the delay in 9ling the revision. 5. It is well settled that a petition or revision 9led beyond the period of limitation cannot be entertained unless the delay is satisfactorily explained by 9ling 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 suCers from defect of limitation. 7. Accordingly, the revision is hereby dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. Sd Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan