CRL.REV.P.(MAT.)/11/2025 of KIRTI Vs MOHD ADNAN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 11/2025, CRL.M.A. 770/2025 & CRL.M.A.771/2025771/2025

KIRTI.....Petitioner

Through:Mr. Keshav, Advocate

versus

MOHD ADNAN.....Respondent

Through:None

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R R14.01.2025

1.The present revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 430 of Bharatiya NagarikSuraksha Sanhita, 2023 impugns orders dated 22[nd]August, 2024 and 25[th]September, 2024 passed by the Principle Judge, Central District, Tis HazariCourt, Delhi in MT. No. 359/2022, whereby the written statement filed onbehalf of the Respondent on 21[st]August, 2024 has been taken on record,without imposition of cost, despite the delay in filing the same.

2.The Petitioner argues that the Trial Court ought not to have grantedthis indulgence. The proceedings conducted on various dates prior to theimpugnedorders,indicatethatRespondentwasdeliberatelyandintentionally delaying the proceedings and not filing the written statementwithin the time allotted. In such circumstances, the written statement whichwas filed after considerable delay, ought not to have been taken on record

without any imposition of cost.

3.The Court has considered the aforenoted contentions. Although, thereis delay on the part of the Respondent in filing the written statement,however, in the opinion of the Court, this discretion which is been exercisedby the Trial Court does not call for any interference by this Court as thewritten statement in such matters is essential for the purpose of calculatingthe maintenance amount sought by the Petitioner. The written statementwould, in fact, aid the Petitioner also making submissions for the claim ofmaintenance.

4.In light of foregoing, the Court is not inclined to entertain the presentpetition, Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of along with pendingapplications.

JANUARY 14, 2025/ab

SANJEEV NARULA, J