Disposed¶26

Smt Smita W/O Prashant Udapure @ Smita D/O Dr Pmprakash Tripathi and Another v. Prashant Shamrao Udapure

Bombay HC2 Dec 2025CP/53/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition by wife against husband for non-disclosure of April 2022 employment in alleged breach of Bombay HC (Nagpur Bench) order dated 07.03.2022 in CWP 604/2021(D), which had reduced the JMFC Gondia maintenance (Rs.30,000/- plus Rs.15,000/- rent = Rs.45,000/- per month, order dated 31.10.2020) after the husband pleaded unemployment; Court defers strict action citing matrimonial dispute, directs affidavits on maintenance arrears, lists matter on 08.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

No strict contempt action taken at this stage; both parties directed to file independent affidavits disclosing the status of the maintenance proceedings and arrears outstanding; matter listed on 08.12.2025. ¶26

Smt Smita W/O Prashant Udapure @ Smita D/O Dr Pmprakash Tripathi and Another vs Prashant Shamrao Udapure — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent committed contempt of this Court's order dated 07.03.2022 in Criminal Writ Petition No.604/2021 by securing employment in April 2022 and failing to disclose it to the Judicial Magistrate or any Court. +1 more

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Observing that the petition arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the Court held that, to subserve the interest of justice, it would be proper to resolve the matter amicably rather than take strict action.

¶25

Key takeaways

The Court directed both parties to place on record, by independent affidavits, the status of the maintenance proceedings and the arrears remaining unpaid, with an appropriate order to be passed after receipt of the affidavits.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench (Pravin S. Patil, J.), 05.12.2025 — Contempt Petition No.53/2024 in Criminal Writ Petition No.604/2021(D). By order dated 31.10.2020 the learned JMFC, Gondia had directed the respondent-husband to pay Rs.30,000/- maintenance and Rs.15,000/- house rent (total Rs.45,000/-) per month to the petitioner-wife. On his writ challenge, pleading that he was out of employment, this Court by order dated 07.03.2022 allowed the writ petition, reduced the amount of maintenance, and directed that any renewal of his contract or fresh contract with another company be disclosed before the trial Court (with a reciprocal duty on the wife to place documents on record if she secured a job). Alleging that the respondent took up employment in April 2022 without disclosing it to the Judicial Magistrate or any Court, the petitioners filed this contempt petition. Noting the matrimonial-dispute context, the Court declined to take strict action, directed both sides to file independent affidavits on the status of the maintenance proceedings and the arrears outstanding, and reserved an appropriate order thereafter; the matter was listed on 08.12.2025.

¶1

33 cp 53-2024.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.53/2024 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.604/2021(D)

¶6

Smt. Smita w/o Prashant Udapure @ Smita d/o Dr. Omprakash Tripathi and another

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Prashant Shamrao Udapure

¶9

¶10

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders or directions

¶11

and Registrar's orders

¶12

- - - - ----- ------------ - Shri A.N. Vastani, Advocate for petitioners Shri K.R. Tripathi, Advocate for respondent

¶13

CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J. DATE : 05.12.2025

¶14

The perusal of the record shows that learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gondia, by order dated 31.10.2020 directed the present respondent to pay the maintenance to the present petitioners at the rate of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.15,000/- towards the rent of the house i.e. total Rs.45,000/- per month. The said order was challenged in Criminal Writ Petition No.604/2021.

¶15

In the Writ Petition, the stand was taken by respondent that he is out of employment. Therefore, this Court has reduced the amount of maintenance and recorded specific findings in paragraph No.6 of the order dated 07.03.2022 as under:

¶16

“6. The petition is accordingly allowed in

¶17

33 cp 53-2024.odt

¶18

¶19

above term. It is, however, made clear that in case the petitioner's contract is renewed or he enters into another contract with another company, the petitioner shall be under an obligation to disclose the same before the trial Court and to place the copy of the same, before it, considering which it would then be permissible for the learned JMFC to pass appropriate order in that regard. Similarly in case Respondent No.1/wife secures the job, she will also be under an obligation to place relevant documents on record, in which case also the learned JMFC shall consider appropriate molding of the amount of maintenance and rental as directed in this order.”

¶20

In the present petition, it is alleged that though the respondent got employment in the month of April 2022, he has not disclosed the said fact to the Judicial Magistrate nor to any Court and thereby he has committed contempt of the order of this Court.

¶21

Learned Counsel for respondent has stated that there is a delay on his part to give information to the Court about his appointment. However, he stated that due to complaints at the instance of present petitioners to the officers of his Company, he is facing serious hardship and his service is in danger.

¶22

In the circumstances, it is clear that the present petition is arising out of a matrimonial dispute and to

¶23

33 cp 53-2024.odt

¶24

¶25

subserve the interest of justice, it will be proper that instead of taking strict action in the matter, this matter should be resolved amicably.

¶26

In my view, for that purpose, it is necessary to direct the parties to place on record the status of the maintenance proceedings and how much arrears are remained to be paid by their independent affidavit on record. After receipt of the same, an appropriate order will be passed to resolve the controversy in the matter.

¶27

List the matter on 08.12.2025.

¶28

R.S. Sahare

¶29

Signed by: Mrs. Ranjana Sahare Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 05/12/2025 15:10:50

Smt Smita W/O Prashant Udapure @ Smita D/O Dr Pmprakash Tripathi and Another v. Prashant Shamrao Udapure

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Smita W/O Prashant Udapure @ Smita D/O Dr Pmprakash Tripathi and Another v. Prashant Shamrao Udapure

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shri. Devendra Krishnakumar Rambhad Vs the State of Maharashtra,Thr. Secretary Education Dept. Mumbai and Others

Kalimulla Ajimulla vs Shri. Hitesh S/O. Mathuradas Kariya

Sau Sushila Wd/O Pundlikrao Dharmey vs Sau Seema W/O Ganesh Itankar and Other

Shri. Nikhil Kishor Bawane and Othes vs Sau. Nandatai Alias Nirmala Vinayak Hajare and Others

Purshottam S/O Parasram Nagpure and Others vs Mahatma Gandhi Smark Samiti, Lakhani, Thr. President Dr. Vikas Shankarrao Gabhane

Kashish Gopal Mulchandani (Ku. Jyoti Guraldas Ahuja) vs Gopal Jethanand Mulchandani