Dismissed¶19

Chandrama kumar v. Radha Devi

Patna HC15 Jul 2025CR. REV./124/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; Section 5 Limitation Act; 175 days delay; Section 125 Cr.P.C.; maintenance case; Maintenance Case No. 190 of 2022; ex parte disposal; transferable job; negligence; unexplained delay; dismissal; Criminal Revision No.124 of 2025; Patna High Court; Madhubani; Bibek Chaudhuri.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's conduct showed he was absolutely negligent in contesting the maintenance case, and the delay was not properly explained. ¶17

Chandrama kumar Vs Radha Devi — Maintenance and Alimony | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.124 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Madhubani

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Chandrama kumar S/o Mahatma Mahto R/o Village- Baliya, PSMaharajganj, District- Siwan, Presently residing at Mohalla - A.G. Colony PS.- Shashtrinagar, Distt.- Patna

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

Radha Devi W/o Chandrama Kumar, D/o Prem Kumar Nayam R/o vill - Baliya, P.S.- Maharajganj, Distt.- Siwan, Presently Residing at vill - Malijan, P.s.- Halesar, Distt.- sonitpur (Assam)

¶8

... ... Respondent/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Ranjan For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 15-07-2025

¶11

The petitioner has approached this Court by filing an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay by 175 days.

¶12

In filing the instant revision on the ground that the impugned order in favour of opposite party was passed ex parte and the Maintenance Case No. 190 of 2022 was disposed of on 9^th of May, 2024 behind the back of the petitioner and without his knowledge.

¶13

It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner initially received notice of the above-mentioned proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. He also engaged his Advocate to contest the case. However, the

¶14

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.124 of 2025(3) dt.15-07-2025 2/2

¶15

job of the petitioner was transferable and during the pendency of the case, he transferred to some other place. On being transferred, he did not keep any information about the maintenance case and finally it was disposed of ex parte.

¶16

The maintenance case was filed in the 2022 and the same was disposed of on 9^th of May, 2024. It is not known to the Court during these two years, in how many places the petitioner was posted, which debarred him to take information of his maintenance case.

¶17

The conduct of the petitioner clearly shows that he was absolutely negligent in contesting the aforesaid maintenance case and delay was not property explained.

¶18

For the reasons stated above, this Court is not in a position to condone the delay and the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is dismissed.

¶19

With the dismissal of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the revisional application is also dismissed.

¶20

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)

¶21

uttam/-

¶22

Chandrama kumar v. Radha Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrama kumar v. Radha Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anjalee Devi @ Anjalee Kumari Vs Ajeet Kumar Gupta

Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Kumar Singh @ Vijay Singh @ Bijay Singh @ Vijya Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rajballabh Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Bashistha Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar