The High Court
Case Details
- -1- CRM-M-38181 38181-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH (127) Subhash Chander Subhash Chander Sunita and Ors. Sunita and Ors. CRM-M-38181-2025 .07.2025 Date of Decision:- 29.07.2025 Versus petitioner ……petitioner s ……Respondents CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
ALOK JAIN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN Present: Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. **** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) ALOK JAIN, 1. The present petition challenges the order dated 07.04.2025, The present petition challenges the order dated 07.04.2025, The present petition challenges the order dated 07.04.2025, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to 1 was dismissed. further cross-examine PW-1 was dismissed. further cross 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order is Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order is Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order is speaking and fails to address the contentions raised in the petitioner’s non-speaking and fails to address the contentions raised in the petitioner’s speaking and fails to address the contentions raised in the petitioner’s speaking and fails to address the contentions raised in the petitioner’s hich application, particularly those outlined in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, and 6, which application, particularly those outlined in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, and 6, w application, particularly those outlined in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, and 6, w are crucial to the final adjudication of the case. are crucial to the final adjudication of the case. are crucial to the final adjudication of the case. 3. further submits that the petitioner seeks only one Counsel further submits that the petitioner seeks only one further submits that the petitioner seeks only one 1, specifically on the issues raised in the opportunity to cross-examine PW-1, specifically on the issues raised in the 1, specifically on the issues raised in the opportunity to cross application. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner application. not attempting that the petitioner is not attempting he to delay the trial, rather, he wishes to properly defend the case because he to delay the trial, rather, he wishes to properly defend the case to delay the trial, rather, he wishes to properly defend the case has already retired from service and faces significant financial implications. retired from service and faces significant financial implications. retired from service and faces significant financial implications. pointed out that although the petitioner’s Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that although the petitioner’s pointed out that although the petitioner’s Learned counsel ers have attained majority, the petitioner continues to bear their daughters have attained majority, the petitioner continues to bear their ers have attained majority, the petitioner continues to bear their ers have attained majority, the petitioner continues to bear their - expenses. He relies upon the order passed by the Court in CRR(F)-1186- expenses. He relies upon the order passed by the Court in CRR(F) expenses. He relies upon the order passed by the Court in CRR(F) to 2024, which recorded that the petitioner had already paid Rs.4,81,000/- to 2024, which recorded that the petitioner had already paid Rs.4,81,000/ 2024, which recorded that the petitioner had already paid Rs.4,81,000/ MANJU 2025.07.31 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document maintenance. respondent No.1 towards interim maintenance. respondent No.1 towards - -2- CRM-M-38181 38181-2025 4. Counsel submits on earlier occasions, when that on earlier occasions, when on earlier occasions, when the the the respondent- wife’s evidence was ongoing, wife’s evidence was ongoing, wife’s evidence was ongoing, the the the learned learned learned trial Court trial Court trial Court prematurely closed the petitioner’s evidence, which was challenged through prematurely closed the petitioner’s evidence, which was challenged through prematurely closed the petitioner’s evidence, which was challenged through prematurely closed the petitioner’s evidence, which was challenged through CRR(F)-1186 1186-2024. The closure was based on an incorrect assu mption that 2024. The closure was based on an incorrect assumption that the petitioner was in arrears of maintenance, which was subsequently the petitioner was in arrears of maintenance, which was subsequently the petitioner was in arrears of maintenance, which was subsequently the petitioner was in arrears of maintenance, which was subsequently clarified and the above said petition was allowed vide order dated clarified and the above said petition was allowed vide order dated clarified and the above said petition was allowed vide order dated clarified and the above said petition was allowed vide order dated 13.09.2024. As a result, the petitioner was granted the opportunity to lead . As a result, the petitioner was granted the opportunity to lead As a result, the petitioner was granted the opportunity to lead ation of respondent No.1. The relevant evidence, including cross-examination of respondent No.1. The relevant ation of respondent No.1. The relevant evidence, including cross extract of order dated 13.09.2024 relied upon by the petitioner is extract of order dated 13.09.2024 relied upon by the petitioner is extract of order dated 13.09.2024 relied upon by the petitioner is extract of order dated 13.09.2024 relied upon by the petitioner is reproduced as follows: reproduced as follows: "Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and "Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and "Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and s in the larger interest of justice, the instant revision petition is in the larger interest of justice, the instant revision petition i allowed and the petitioner shall be granted one effective allowed and the petitioner shall be granted one effective allowed and the petitioner shall be granted one effective examine respondent No.1, Sunita, at his opportunity to cross-examine respondent No.1, Sunita, at his examine respondent No.1, Sunita, at his own responsibility. The learned Family Court shall also decide own responsibility. The learned Family Court shall also decide own responsibility. The learned Family Court shall also decide 9) filed by the the application dated 23.01.2024 (Annexure P-9) filed by the the application dated 23.01.2024 (Annexure P expeditiously, preferably within a period of four petitioner, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today." 5. ollowing the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that following the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that f cross-examination conducted on 23.10.2 024, defence evidence commenced, examination conducted on 23.10.2024, defence evidence commenced, 024, defence evidence commenced, whereby, witnesses RW-2, RW-4, RW-5, and RW whereby, w ught forth new 5, and RW-7 brought forth new developments, the petitioner filed a material facts. In light of these new developments, the petitioner filed a developments, the petitioner filed a material facts. In light of these fresh second application on 07.04.2025 under Section 311 Cr.P.C./348 second application on 07.04.2025 under Section 311 Cr.P.C./348 application on 07.04.2025 under Section 311 Cr.P.C./348 - BNSS seeking one more opportunity to cross-examine respondent No.1- BNSS seeking one more opportunity to cross BNSS seeking one more opportunity to cross wife. The said The said application was dismissed vide order dated 07.04.2025 not vide order dated 07.04.2025 not MANJU 2025.07.31 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document - -3- CRM-M-38181 38181-2025 on merits, but on the presumption that the petitioner was attempting to on merits, but on the presumption that the petitioner was attempting to on merits, but on the presumption that the petitioner was attempting to on merits, but on the presumption that the petitioner was attempting to delay the proceedings. delay the proceedings. 6. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not playing delay tactics to procrast petitioner is not inate the trial, on the to procrastinate the trial, on the contrary, the petitioner desires its expeditious conclusion and respectfully the petitioner desires its expeditious conclusion and respectfully desires its expeditious conclusion and respectfully requests one last opportunity to cross-examine PW requests one 1/wife on the relevant examine PW-1/wife on the relevant issues raised in the application. issues raised in the application. 7. s, that the Learned counsel also submits, on instructions, that the Learned counsel also submits, on instruction petitioner is is continuously maintaining his two adult daughters and had now is two adult daughters and had now retired from employment, any decision made without considering from employment, therefore any decision made without considering any decision made without considering the relevant evidence which is to be extracte the relevant evidence 1 would result in ed through PW-1 would result in The issues raised in the application are instrumental in a travesty of justice. The issues raised in the application are instrumental in The issues raised in the application are instrumental in a travesty of justice. determining the rightful quantum of maintenance and in assessing whether determining the rightful quantum of maintenance and in assessing whether determining the rightful quantum of maintenance and in assessing whether determining the rightful quantum of maintenance and in assessing whether maintaining herself or not the wife is capable of maintaining herself or not the wife is capable of 8. by learned counsel for the petitioner that It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by learned counsel for the petitioner that the costs imposed ts imposed vide order dated 07.04.2025 has been duly deposited, and order dated 07.04.2025 has been duly deposited, and the matter is now fixed for arguments on 07.08.2025. the matter is now fixed for arguments on 07.08.2025. the matter is now fixed for arguments on 07.08.2025. 9. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the nature Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the nature Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the nature of the order to be passed, notice of motion if of the order to be passed, notice of dents shall motion if issued to the respondents shall only procrastinate the proceedings . The delay, if any, may be compensated procrastinate the proceedings. The delay, if any, may be compensated . The delay, if any, may be compensated by way of costs. by way of costs. 10. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted one final opportunity to Accordingly, the petitioner is granted one final opportunity to Accordingly, the petitioner is granted one final opportunity to cross-examine respondent wife, strictly on the issues raised in the examine respondent-wife, strictly on the issues raised in the wife, strictly on the issues raised in the petitioner shall be responsible for serving the summons application. The petitioner shall be responsible for serving the summons petitioner shall be responsible for serving the summons application. The and depositing of any other necessary expenses and depositing learned necessary expenses if so required. The learned MANJU 2025.07.31 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38181 38181-2025 trial Court shall ensure that respondent No.1 trial Court shall ensure that respondent examined No.1-wife is duly cross-examined on the date already fixed before it only on the date s y qua the issue raised in his - -4- application dated 07.04.2025. This opportun ity is subject to payment of . This opportunity is subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs to the respondent-wife. 11. The present petition is disposed of in above terms. The present petition is disposed of in above terms. , 2025 July 29, 2025 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable:- Whether Reportable: speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Yes/No (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE MANJU 2025.07.31 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document