p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMP No. 543 of 2026 1. Laila Bibi 2. Saera Anjum 3. Saiba Anjum 4. Mohammad Arman …. Petitioners Mr. Subhankar Das, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Soumya Ranjan Das, Advocate -versus- 1. Mohammad Abu Tahir 2. Sugarutun Bibi …. Opp. Parties CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 06.05.2026 (Through hybrid Mode) 01. 1. The grievance of the Petitioners is that although on 23.05.2025 an order has been passed under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (in short “D.V. Act”) directing the Opposite Party No.1 for payment of Rs.3000/- to the Petitioner No.1 for maintenance and Rs.2000/- each to the Petitioners No.2, 3 and 4 for their education and maintenance with the further direction that the maintenance shall be paid within first week of every succeeding English calendar month granting liberty to the Petitioners to execute the order through process of Court, only a nominal amount has been paid. 2. Mr. Subhankar Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Soumya Ranjan Das, learned counsel for the Petitioners files a memo along with order sheets of the learned J.M.F.C., p. 2 Baramba in D.V. Case No. 03 of 2023 which contains from order dated 01.11.2025 to 30.03.2026. The same is taken on record. 3. Since the Opposite Party No.1 did not pay any amount awarded by the learned J.M.F.C., Baramba towards interim maintenance, an application under Section 144(3) of the BNSS was filed on 18.09.2025. It is grievance of the Petitioners that the said application filed on 18.09.2025, is still pending and being adjourned even when counsel for the Opposite Parties or the Opposite Party No.1 is not present. 4. Perusal of the order sheet reveals that on 18.09.2025, the petition under Section 144(3) of the BNSS has been filed, the same was adjourned to 24.09.2025. No steps were taken on behalf of either party, so the matter was adjourned to 14.10.2025. On 25.09.2025, the case record was put up on an advance petition filed by the learned counsel for the Petitioner for hearing a petition dated 18.09.2025 and the matter was adjourned to 14.10.2025. On 14.10.2025, learned counsel for the Petitioner was present and was heard, as learned counsel for the Opposite Party was absent, the case was adjourned to 01.11.2025 for further hearing of the petition. On 01.11.2025, the learned counsel for the Petitioner was present and the matter was adjourned to 24.11.2025. On 17.11.2025, on account of advance petition filed by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, the date was advanced and the petition had been filed by the learned counsel for the Petitioner to pass the necessary order and the application filed under Section 144(3) of BNSS, the matter was adjourned to 24.11.2025 for hearing of the petition. On 24.11.2025, Advocate for the Petitioner was present, but no steps p. 3 were taken by the Opposite Party and the matter was adjourned to 10.12.2025. On 10.12.2025, again Advocate for the Petitioner was present, but no steps were taken by the Opposite Party. On 24.12.2025, no steps were taken by either party and the matter was adjourned to 09.01.2026. On 09.01.2026, Advocate for the Petitioner was present, but no steps were taken by the Opposite Party and the matter was adjourned to 28.01.2026 for hearing of the Petition dated 17.11.2025 and further hearing of petition dated 18.09.2025. On 28.01.2025 (this seems to be a typographical error for 28.01.2026), Advocate for the Petitioner was present and Advocate for the Opposite Party was again absent, but the matter was adjourned to 20.02.2026. On 20.02.2026, Advocate for the Petitioner was present, but no steps were taken by the Opposite Party and the case was adjourned to 13.03.2026 for hearing of the petition dated 17.11.2025 and further hearing of the petition dated 18.09.2025. On 13.03.2026, no steps were taken by either party and the matter was adjourned to 03.03.2026 (this seems to be a typographical error for 30.03.2026). On 30.03.2026, no steps were taken by either party, but the matter was adjourned to 21.04.2026. 5. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that on 21.04.2026, the matter has been adjourned to this month. 6. After perusing the annextures especially the order sheets of the learned J.M.F.C., Barama in D.V. Case No. 03 of 2023, it is apparent that in spite of order passed on 23.05.2025 under Section 23 of D.V. Act and an application having been filed thereafter under Section 144(3) of the BNSS, the Petitioners have been deprived of the benefit of the order dated 23.05.2025. It is p. 4 also found that even in the absence of the Opposite Party No.1 the matter is being adjourned by the learned Magistrate. 7. As the order has been passed for interim maintenance of the Petitioner No.1 as well as the education of Petitioners No.2, 3 and 4, non-payment must be causing hardship to them. 8. The CRLMP is therefore disposed of directing the learned J.M.F.C., Barama to dispose of the application under Section 144(3) of the BNSS filed on 18.09.2025 as well as the application filed on 17.11.2025 by 22.05.2026. 9. In view of the provision contained in Section 12(5) of the D.V. Act, it is further directed that the application under Section 12 of D.V. Act shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party 10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Savitri Ratho) Judge Sukanta Designation: Senior Stenographer