Allowed¶32

Ashvini Ashish Moon v. Ashish Naresh Moon

Bombay HC20 Jan 2025WP/57/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ashwini Ashish Moon v. Ashish Naresh Moon, Criminal Writ Petition No. 57 of 2025, High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, decided 20/01/2025 by Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J. Challenge under writ to order dated 18/12/2024 of Judge, Family Court No.2, Nagpur (Exhibit No.42) rejecting application to set aside no cross-examination order in matrimonial proceedings; petition allowed; no-cross order quashed; petitioner permitted to cross-examine respondent on 23/01/2025; further adjournment applications barred on that date; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; impugned order dated 18/12/2024 (Exhibit No.42) quashed and set aside; petitioner permitted to cross-examine the respondent on 23/01/2025; Family Court not to entertain adjournment applications of the petitioner on that date; Rule made absolute; no order as to costs. ¶32

Ashvini Ashish Moon Vs Ashish Naresh Moon — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner was entitled to have the no cross-examination order set aside so as to afford her an opportunity to cross-examine the respondent in the matrimonial proceedings pending before Family Court No.2, Nagpur, notwithstanding the rejection of her application dated 18/12/2024.

¶18

Court's answer

In the interest of justice, an opportunity is to be granted to the petitioner to cross-examine the witness; counsel being busy in another court cannot be a reason to deny cross-examination altogether, though unnecessary adjournments will not be tolerated.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The order dated 18/12/2024 passed by Family Court No.2, Nagpur rejecting the petitioner's application for setting aside the no-cross order is quashed and set aside.

¶33

Key takeaways

The petitioner is permitted to cross-examine the respondent on 23/01/2025.ratio¶34
The Family Court, Nagpur shall not entertain any adjournment application of the petitioner on 23/01/2025.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench (Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.) — Criminal Writ Petition No. 57 of 2025, decided 20/01/2025. Petitioner-wife challenged the order dated 18/12/2024 (Exhibit No.42) of Judge, Family Court No.2, Nagpur, rejecting her application to set aside the no cross-examination order and closure of her evidence in matrimonial proceedings, after her counsel was absent on 02/12/2024 and no cross-examination took place till the evening of 03/12/2024. Held that counsel's engagement in another court cannot be a reason to deny cross-examination and that, in the interest of justice, an opportunity had to be granted. The impugned order was quashed and set aside; the petitioner was permitted to cross-examine the respondent on 23/01/2025, with a direction that the Family Court shall not entertain any adjournment application of the petitioner on that date. Rule made absolute; no order as to costs.

2025:BHC-NAG:647

24wp57.2025.odt

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

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 57 OF 2025

¶6

PETITIONER : Sau. Ashwini Ashish Moon, Aged about 36 years, Occupation : Nil, R/o At Khante Nagar, Plot No. 7, near

¶7

Rahul Balsadan Aashram,

¶8

Nagpur -440017 Police Station Pachpaoli.

¶9

VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Shri Ashish Naresh Moon, Aged about 43 years, Occupation – Service, R/o 28/B, Bhagwan Nagar, Near Balaji Bus Stop, Sainath School, Parvati Nagar, Nagpur-27 Mob.:9907198705, 7077756275

¶10

Ms. Kanak Mandpe, counsel h/f Mr. Y.B. Mandpe, counsel for petitioner.

¶11

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATE : 20/01/2025

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶13

Rule.

¶14

Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

¶15

consent of learned counsel Ms. Kanak Mandpe for the petitioner.

¶16

rkn

¶17

2 24wp57.2025.odt

¶18

By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order below Exhibit No.42 dated 18/12/2024 passed by the Judge, Family Court No.2, Nagpur, rejecting the application of the petitioner which was filed for setting aside no cross-examination and closing the evidence of the petitioner

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, who submitted that only once, as learned counsel was busy in another Court, the adjournment application was filed, but the Family Court without giving an opportunity to the present petitioner to crossexamine the respondent passed the order of no cross-examination, and the application filed by the present petitioner for setting aside the no cross-examination order is also rejected and no opportunity was granted to the present petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses.

¶20

From the order, it reveals that matrimonial proceedings is pending between the petitioner and the respondent before the Family Court No.2, Nagpur. The present petitioner, who is an applicant therein, has already adduced her evidence and the record shows that on 18/11/2024, on the request of learned counsel for the applicant, the cross was adjourned. Thereafter

rkn

24wp57.2025.odt

02/12/2024, the matter was fixed for cross-examination of the respondent. On that day, learned counsel for the petitioner was present in the morning session, but he remained absent. Hence, in the afternoon session, no cross-examination was conducted on 02/12/2024, and the matter was kept on 03/12/2024. Till evening of 03/12/2024 no cross-examination was conducted and therefore, the order came to be passed against the present petitioner.

¶25

From the order passed by the Family Court, it reveals that, without due reason, the cross-examination of respondent was kept pending. Till evening of 03/12/2024 no cross-examination of the witness was taken on a mere reason that, the learned counsel for the petitioner was busy in another court and it cannot be a reason to grant an adjournment. However, in the interest of justice, an opportunity is to be granted to the present petitioner to cross-examine the witness. However, the petitioner shall not seek unnecessary adjournment and shall not harassed the respondent by keeping him waiting till the evening. Now, the matter is already listed on 23/01/2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner shown his willingness to cross-examine the respondent on 23/01/2025

rkn

24wp57.2025.odt

itself.

Considering the submission and statement made by

¶31

the learned counsel for petitioner, the petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order.

¶32

a] The criminal writ petition is allowed.

¶33

b] The order passed by the Family Court No.2, Nagpur dated 18/12/2024, rejecting the application of the petitioner for setting aside the no-cross order is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶34