ARPIT GUPTA vs SMT. ANJALI GUPTA — CRR/733/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 18th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010158472026

Filing Number

CRR/6680/2026

Filing Date

17-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRR/733/2026

Registration Date

16-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS RELATING TO MAINTENANCE U/S 144 & 146 OF B.N.S.S. 2023 ( 1402 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

18-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ARPIT GUPTA

    Adv. PRAGATI PANDEY,SHANTANU SHENDE,SHANTANU SHENDE, ,PRASHANT SAHU

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SMT. ANJALI GUPTA

  2. 2.Minor Rishi Gupta

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Case Summary: CRR/733/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed Arpit Gupta's criminal revision petition challenging an order dated 05.09.2024 regarding a matter involving his wife Smt. Anjali Gupta and minor son Rishi Gupta. The court rejected his application for condonation of a 499-day delay in filing the revision, finding the applicant's explanation—that he needed time to collect documents and consult counsel—insufficient under law. The court held that poverty, ignorance of law, and mere inconvenience cannot constitute "sufficient cause" for delay, and that the applicant failed to identify any circumstance arising within the limitation period that prevented timely filing. Consequently, the revision petition was dismissed as barred by limitation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Jun-2026

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRR/733/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRR/733/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed Arpit Gupta's criminal revision petition challenging an order dated 05.09.2024 regarding a matter involving his wife Smt. Anjali Gupta and minor son Rishi Gupta. The court rejected his application for condonation of a 499-day delay in filing the revision, finding the applicant's explanation—that he needed time to collect documents and consult counsel—insufficient under law. The court held that poverty, ignorance of law, and mere inconvenience cannot constitute "sufficient cause" for delay, and that the applicant failed to identify any circumstance arising within the limitation period that prevented timely filing. Consequently, the revision petition was dismissed as barred by limitation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case