Page 1 of 7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

RPFAM No.263 of 2024

(An application under Sec-19 (4) of Family Courts Act

and with Sec-397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure)

CNR No.ODHC010678262024

Sujata Rath @ Tripathy ….... Petitioner

-Versus-

Anuja Tripathy ....... Opposite Party

Advocate for the parties

For Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Das,

Advocate

For Opposite Party : Ms. Sudhamayee Das,

Advocate

...................

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Date of Hearing and Judgment: 21.09.2026

_____________________________________________________________

S.K. MISHRA, J.

1. The present revision petition has been preferred by

the Petitioner-wife challenging the judgment dated

13.08.2024, passed in Cr.P. No.84 of 2023 by the learned

Judge, Family Court, Jajpur, vide which her application for

maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C stood rejected.

Page 2 of 7

2. On being noticed, since the Opposite Party-

husband has appeared, on consent of the learned Counsel for

the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing and disposal

at the stage of admission.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, his

Client preferred Cr.P. No.84 of 2023 under Section 125

Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance in her favour from the Opposite

Party-husband. Though the learned Court below recorded the

evidence of the parties, but, passed the impugned order

dismissing the said application on contest basically on the

ground that the Opposite Party-husband preferred C.P. No.36

of 2023 for restitution of conjugal rights with the Petitioner.

Since, the Petitioner was directed to live with the Opposite

Party-husband along with her children; she and her children

are not entitled to maintenance from the Opposite Party-

husband.

4.1. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits,

Cr.P. No.84 of 2023 and C.P. No.36 of 2023 were pendi ng

before the same Court, i.e., learned Judge, Family Court,

Jajpur. C.P. No.36 of 2023 was disposed of on 12.08.2024 ,

Page 3 of 7

whereas Cr.P. No.84 of 2023 was dismissed on the very next

day, i.e., on 13.08.2024. Since both the said proceedings are

independent proceedings, the learned Court below should not

have relied upon its findings in C.P. No.36 of 2023, to deny

maintenance to the Petitioner-wife, as well as her children.

4.2. He further submits, because of torture and assault,

the Petitioner-wife preferred DV Misc. Case No.2 of 2023

under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic

Violence Act, 2005 and also filed application for maintenance

before the learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur. Though there was

sufficient cause to remain separately and it was pleaded and

proved in Cr.P. No.84 of 2023, the learned Court below failed

to take note of the evidence on record, while passing the

impugned judgment. Accordingly, he submits, the impugned

judgment be set aside and the matter be remitted back for re-

adjudication of Cr.P. No.84 of 2023 in accordance with law.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the Opposite Party-

husband submits, the learned Court below was justified to

pass the impugned order, in view of the observations made

therein. There being no infirmity in the said order, the present

revision be dismissed.

Page 4 of 7

6. As is revealed from the record, C.P. No.36 of 2023

was preferred by the Opposite Party-husband under Section 9

of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, before the learned Judge,

Family Court, Jajpur for restitution of conjugal rights,

whereas, the present Petitioner-wife preferred Cr.P. No.84 of

2023 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for maintenance before the

self-same Court, i.e., learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur.

Cr.P. No.84 of 2023 was filed on 11.04.2023, whereas C.P.

No.36 of 2023 was preferred by the Opposite Party-husband

on 30.01.2023. The learned Court below simultaneously

proceeded in both the said matters.

7. The learned Court below disposed of the Section 9

application (C.P. No.36 of 2023) just one day before passing of

the impugned judgment in Cr.P. No.84 of 2023, i.e., on

12.08.2024, directing the present Petitioner to join the society

of the Opposite Party-husband with her children within three

months from the said order to resume the conjugal life with

the Opposite Party-husband. On the very next date, i.e., on

13.08.2024, vide the impugned judgment, denied to grant

maintenance basically on the ground that the said Court has

directed the Petitioner to join the society of the Opposite

Page 5 of 7

Party-husband along with her children within three months

from the date of order in C.P. No.36 of 2022 . Paragraph

No.11 of the said judgment, being relevant, is reproduced

below:

“11. Besides, the most significant point is that

this court directed the petitioner to join the

society of the OP along with her children within

three months from the date of order in the CP

No.36 of 2022 filed by the OP for restitution of

his conjugal rights with the petitioner. Since,

the petitioner is directed to live with the

OP along with her children, she and her

children are not entitled to maintenance

from him.”

(Emphasis supplied)

8. That apart, the learned Court below also failed to

take note of the fact on record that for domestic violence, the

Petitioner preferred DV Misc. Case No.2 of 2023 under Section

12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,

2005 and also filed application for maintenance before the

learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur and was getting monthly

maintenance of Rs.4,500/-, being so modified by the learned

District & Sessions Judge, Jajpur in Criminal Appeal No.26 of

2023 though initially a direction was given by the learned

Page 6 of 7

S.D.J.M to pay maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per month.

Further, MATA No.338 of 2024 is pending before this Court

challenging the said decree passed by the learned Court below

for restitution of conjugal rights in C.P. No.36 of 2023.

9. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated

13.08.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court,

Jajpur in Cr.P. No.84 of 2023 is set aside. The matter is

remitted back to the learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur to

re-decide the maintenance, to be awarded in favour of the

Petitioner.

10. It is made clear that while re-adjudicating the issue

of maintenance, the learned Court below shall also take note

of the fact regarding maintenance awarded in favour of the

Petitioner-wife in D.V. Misc. Case No.2 of 2023, in view of

the judgment of Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha and

others, reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324.

11. Since the Cr.P. is of the year 2023, the parties shall

be allowed to adduce additional evidence to substantiate their

respective stand before the Court below, if they so intend. The

learned Court below shall do well to re-adjudicate the matter

at the earliest, preferably by end of January, 2026.

Page 7 of 7

12. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

No order as to costs.

Urgent certified copy of this judgment be granted

on proper application as per rules.

…….……………………

S.K. MISHRA, J.

Orissa High Court, Cuttack.

Dated, 21

st September, 2026/Kanhu